Skip to main content

Full text of "Max Rieser Collection 1906-1980"

See other formats

AR 7207 

Guide to the 
Papers of Max 





ni< -7J0 







Bucknell University. Lewisburg, Pennsylvania 

We acknowledge receipt of your manuscript, which will be given 
our/prompt attention. Thank you for submitting it. 

Editor __wY-^--i7----<i---^^3ii:^J'-^ 




A Scholarly Journal oi Letters, Arts, and Science 


OctoTDer 16, 1962 

Mr. Max Rieser 

c/o American Society for Aesthetics 

Hotel Kenmore 

^90 Common-wealth Avenue 

Boston, Massachusetts 

Dear Mr. Rieser: 

I should like to consider your paper on 
"Russian Aesthetics at the Present Time and 
its Historical Background" for possible puh- 
lication in Buckneil Review, which is an inter- 
disciplinary scholarly Journal of the sciences, 
arts, and letters. The Editorial Board and I 
would appreciate your letting us see the essay 
at your convenience. 

Sincerely yours, 

^y^iM^^ ^a 


Harry R. Gai^in 



IOT0mb9r 88^ 196e 

BuolrnoXl B«vi#w 

Lewl bürg:,, PctmtylranlÄ 


Des« Mr» 0ar 


PluAnn y#t»\vii fclrdlj nv B\rttii?*orl^t '•Cn Mislan 
A'^tsthtitloi" whtoh I 9f*»t tc ^ou for eAf toTlai con«iÄ»ratlon 
oa Oeto>?er 29^ a.o« I iM'St wlthdraw It to «9 gr^st ?«g:et* 
I£ ^ou afi infeör#»t#4 in fefie topio ^ho^eir«r, I tiopn to t)9 
abl« to D«rlt# In t;b9 n^ar ftifrtrjrt qu art^lole on tha i«m9 topio 

iiii(ifr«»<> ;om# Yon ma; be p^rhaps also intcr«sttd in an artiole 
on PhilOÄopb5 in PoXand^ If that w«re tht 0.<ni9,pI«nM lot rae 

DX0 XfiJI ll#Mtf 

Mr, Harry i?. Qarvia 
Bditor of "BuoJoiell fleview« 

»e« Mr. Sarriu : 

üotobej 29,10r)2 

A«oth9t;io«,in Boaton. Thaflk^mf ^5,^' A»«i-ioaa Sootati? for 

in the «y.nt of ita ralooti^-^r,^! ^* *'*^'^ »» po^albl« 
drt, Of pubUoatior! ll n'^^rrao^iptod.^'"'''^ ^^^ ^^* 


Journal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 


The American Academy of Arts and Sciences 
38 Kirkland Street, Harvard University 
Cambridge 38, Massachusetts 


The American Academy of Arts and Sciences 
280 Newton Street, Brookline Station 
Boston 46, Massachusetts 

Dr. Max Rieser 

519 West 121 Street 

New York 27, New York 

Dear Dr. Rieser: 

Please address your reply to: 

Editorial Office 
11 February 1963 

Thank you very much for your letter of 30 January. 
As you know, DAEDALUS is so organized round a central theme 
that each article is commissioned. Our plans for future is- 
sues for the next year or so do not provide a convenient 
place for Publishing an article on philosophy in Poland, 
and we would not wish to ask you to submit an article that 
would in all probability not be published in DAEDALUS with- 
in the next five years. 

Thank you for thinking of DAEDALUS as a place where 
you would wish to publish your work. 

Sincerely yours, 

Stephen R. Graubard 



Januar j^ 30 , 1963 

Prof«68or Stephen R. öraubard 

1dl tor 


Aaerloan koaiexiQ of Arta a id Solenoea 

880 lewton Sqnare 

Brookllne Station 

Boston 46 


Oear Professor Graubard; 

„-, ^ , ^ Pleaae let me klndly know wh*^i;her 
Uaedalus'' would be Intere^ted in an artlols cn 
pbiloaophj In Poland» I wae ap oial editor of a aonble 

}«*^!n^^^S*/^^'5?^ ^' Phlloeophy'' devot^d to r^hilosophy 
in Poland (ToX. LVII Ho* 7, Maroh 31,1960). »»The «>otirn4 
Of Aeethetioe ^ Art aritloi?.m'» of who^e Sdltorlal Jounoil 

i4!^'.,^* ataber durlng two periods oarrled an artlole of 
nine »'aontemporarj Aeathetio» in Poland "in it;^ ler/ij 
XX/4. Summer 196S. "Ihe Journal of tbe Hietory of Idea« 
carrled materlal of mlne on rel^^ted &nb.1 Mte , 


^i 9 

Uf^x i 






A Scholarly Journal of Letters, Arts, and Science 


December 7, 1962 

Dr. Max Rieser 

519 West 121st Street 

Nev York 27, New York 

Dear Dr. Rieser: 

I am returning your manuscript to you, 
as requested. I am frankly interested in all 
three topics as suggested by you in your last 
letter, and I shall appreciate your letting 
US see the first essay that you complete. Thank 
you again for accepting my invitation to send 
US a manuscript. 

Sincerely yours^ 

' Harr^ R. Garvin 



Deoember 8, 1962 

Professor Thomas Munro 


The Journal of Aesthetios 8c Art Crltloism 

The Cleveland Museum of Art 

Cleveland 6, Ohio 

Dear Professor Munro : 

Bnolosed I am sending ;you the slightly re- 
vlsed Text of napL paper on Russian Aesthetios* 

I would be very glad to have the galley-proof 
of jour book on The Evolution of the Arts for my article« 
But I am not ehalte sure that you oould have It retarned 
before your departurs to iSurope. But if you oan spare it 
now please send it kindly to me« 

With the best wishes for the ooming 
holiday season from Mrs •Rieser and rayseif to you and 

Mrs, Munro. 

Sincerely yours. 

Dx. Max Rieser 

Volume LVII, No. 7 

March 31, 1960 


The Journal of Philosophy 


POLISH philosophy has a special standing in the bisected world 
because the position of Poland differs profoundly from that of 
the Soviet Union in the intellectual field. Polish philosophy is not 
Marxistically integrated, although it is cultivated in a land which 
is supposed to be ruied in accordance with the prineiples of dia- 
lectical materialism. If Polish philosophy enjoys a much higher 
reputation in the international Community of scholars than Soviet 
philosophy, this is due partly to its relative freedom of expression 
but especially to Polish achievements in the field of logic. The 
leading Polish philosophers are not Marxists, although Poland has 
an influential Marxist philosophical wing. On the other band, 
Polish philosophy differs markedly from Continental philosophy in 
that it has no existentialistic branch and knows no **crisis" men- 
tality. On the whole it continues in the traditions of neo-posi- 
tivism established in the period between the two world wars. 

It is possible to set a date f or the beginning of modern scientific 
philosophy in Poland. It began when Kazimierz Twardowski, a 
disciple of Franz Brentano in Vienna, took over, in 1895, the chair 
of philosophy at the University of Lvov in the Austrian part of 
Poland. Poland had philosophical thinkers before that — adherents 
of Ilegelianism, of a Romantic and patriotic * * messianism ' ' — but 
no philosophical school with a continuous philosophical tradition. 
The oldest Polish University, that of Cracow (founded in 1364), 
was dominated by idealists and Catholic thinkers. In the Polish 
Academy of Sciences, founded at Cracow in 1873, there were at that 
time three philosophers of note — the idealists Kremer and Cieszkow- 
ski and a member of the Papal Academy in Rome, Pawlicki. A 
number of Polish intellectuals, especially in the Russian part of 
Poland, supported the positivistic ideas of Auguste Comte, Her- 
bert Spencer, and F. A. Lange, but they held no university chair. 
The Russified university of Warsaw had a Polish philosophical 
idealist as a teacher— Henryk Struve. Another Polish philosopher, 
the Piatonist Wincenty Lutoslawski, started bis career in the far-off 




Kussian Kazan university. Maurycy Straszewski, in Poland, 
cultivated religious metaphysics. 

This was the picture before Twardowski appeared on the stage. 
He was a pupil of the famous school for the Austrian nobility at 
Vienna, the ' ' Theresianum, " before studying philosophy at the 
University of Vienna under Franz Brentano. It was the latter 's 
ideas that Twardowski introduced in Lvov. Thus the school of 
Lvov established by him was a braneh of German philosophy on 
Polish soil. Twardowski 's importanee was not that of an original 
thinker but of a great teacher and Organizer. He introduced into 
Polish philosophy scientific spirit, rigor, and precision of thought. 
Averse to relativism and scepticism he leaned more toward idealism 
than materialism, and so did most of his pupils. There are some 
parallels between events in Poland and in Germany. Just as Ed- 
mund Husserl — another pupil of Brentano 's — went to Germany 
to introduce scientific ''rigor" into German philosophy, so Twar- 
dowski returned to Poland in 1895 to become a reformer of Polish 
philosophy. He did not, however, fight psychologism as Husserl 
did; he even founded the first psychological laboratory in Poland. 
In 1904, on the lOOth anniversary of Kant 's death, he also founded 
the Polish Philosophical Society, the first of its kind in that 

The school of Lvov was the mother of the school of Warsaw. 
The logical studies that flowered in Warsaw after the first world 
war originated in Lvov. The link between them was formed by 
the Chief of Polish logicians, Jan Lukasiewicz of Lvov. He was 
the founder of mathematical logic in Poland, so that it has been said 
that all who are working in Poland in the field of mathematical 
logic are either pupils of Lukasiewicz or pupils of his pupils. 
Lukasiewicz was himself a pupil of Twardowski and became a 
Docent of philosophy at the university of Lvov in 1906. When 
the university of Warsaw was reorganized and repolonized during 
the World war, Lukasiewicz moved to Warsaw in 1915 and stayed 
there with short interruptions (he was also minister of education in 
the Polish republic) until 1939, when the Germans occupied Poland, 
closed all universities and secondary schools, and prohibited even 
Polish scholars from using the libraries in their own country. 
Many were killed outright or sent to concentration camps. Twen- 
ty-eight university teachers were shot by the Nazis in Lvov alone, 
and are now honored by a memorial erected at the University of 
Wroclaw (Breslau), the present successor of the University of 
Lvov, which now belongs to the Soviet Ukraine. An air bomb hit 
the apartment of Lukasiewicz in Warsaw in 1939 and destroyed 
it with all his belongings, books, and manuscripts. Lukasiewicz, 





vvlio was an lionorary doctor of the University of Münster (West- 
plialia), flod to Münster, where the logieian Heinrich Scholz, his 
personal friend, taught. He tried to leave for Switzerland, but 
could not achieve this purpose during the war. Only afterwards 
did he succeed in leaving, first for Switzerland and then for Ireland, 
where he became professor of mathematical logic in Dublin. There 
he died in 1956, 78 years old. 

It was in Warsaw that Lukasiewicz succeeded in interesting the 
philosopher Stanislaw Lesniewski in symbolic logic. Lukasiewicz 
worked in the field of the propositional calculus, he was interested 
in many-valued logic, and he commented on the logic of Aristotle 
from the Standpoint of modern logic. Lesniewski was interested 
in logical antinomies and in the theory of sets, he worked out a 
calculus of names which he called ontology, etc. The originator 
of semantics in mathematical logic was their common pupil Alfred 
Tarski (now in the United States). Both Lukasiewicz and Les- 
niewski were in the first place philosophers, while Tarski is also 
a professional mathematician. It is owing to the work of these 
three men that Heinrich Scholz, in his history of logic, called 
Poland **ein Hauptland logistischer Forschungen." Sometimes 
Tadeusz Kotarbinski, the Nestor of Polish philosophers (Stanislaw 
Lesniewski passed away long ago) and President of the Polish 
Academy of Sciences in Warsaw, is also mentioned among the 
logicians of the Warsaw school. But although he is a logieian and 
popularized the teachings of mathematical logicians, he does not 
consider himself a specialist in this field. He is interested in the 
semantics of natural languages and in epistemology. He calls his 
own theory — which is close to the physicalism of the Vienna Circle 

-* * reism ' ' 

or * concretism or ''somatism." The last phase of 
this theory is described by Kotarbinski in an article in the philo- 
sophical Journal Studia Füozoficzne, No. 4(7), 1958, under the title 
''The Developmental Phases of Concretism," in a summary in the 
f oUowing way : 

The trend which is here called concretism was originally called reism. It has 
developed from the criticism directed against treating properties as objects 
of a certain kind. That criticism has led the author to the conviction that 
it is only things, i.e., physical objects that can be located in time and space, 
which exist in the basic sense of that word (hence also the term: somatism). 
Grammatical nouns which are not names of things are, from the concretist point 
of view, apparent names (e.g., such names as **property," ' * relation, * ' 
"event,'* ** Situation, * ' etc.). In developing his System the author availed 
himself of the System of logic formulated by the late Stanislaw Lesniewski. 
Confrontation of somatism with the reism of F. Brentano has revealed the 
difference between the author 's monistic and materialistic concretism and 
Brentano 's dualistic doctrine of substance which follows in the path of Des- 
cartes. Brentano admits the existence of hoth material concretes and concretes 



having the characteristics of spiritual substances. A consistent development 
of concretism has led the author to radical reism which states that Statements 
referring apparently to immanent representations are in fact Statements about 
external objects, and to imitationism in relation to the theory of psychological 
Statements which in the author 's opinion are statements about external objects 
extraspective statements which, however, express imitative reactions: they 
express behavior which should be the behavior of the individual to whom the 
given psychological statement refers. 

Concretism has to defend itself against the objection that it formulates 
its theses in syntactically inconsistent statements, e.g., when it is maintained 
that no property is an object, whereas the term "property" cannot be mean- 
ingfuUy used as the subject or the predicate of a simple individual sentence if 
the copula is used in its basic sense. The reply is that the sentence *'no 
property is an object'* is understood not as the negation of the sentence *'some 
property is an object" but as a metaphysical statement stating the meaning- 
lessness of the latter sentence. Another objection is often being raised by 
experts in the set theory who assert that it is impossible to Interpret in the 
concretist way statements referring to the sets of sets. The author realizes 
the difficulties which concretism has to face to defend itself fuUy and main- 
tains that the minimum program of that trend — i.e., the endeavor to reduce all 
sentences to sentences free from apparent names — asserts itself against all 

Despite the terrible losses sustained during the second world 
war, the closing of the universities, and the death or emigration of 
so many scholars, Polish philosophy reemerged in 1945 with its 
continuity preserved and logical studies as prominent as ever. The 
universities of Lvov and Vilna were lost, but those of Lodz, 
Wroelaw, and Torun were added, along with a State university in 
Lublin where a Catholic university already existed and continued to 
function. The head of the Polish logicians was now Kazimierz 
Ajdukiewicz, one the immediate pupils of Twardowski, professor 
at the University of Warsaw, and editor of the Journal Studia 
Logica, devoted mainly to mathematical logic. This periodical in- 
cludes articles in Western languages written by Polish scholars. 
Ajdukiewicz was already close to the neo-positivists and a supporter 
of conventionalism before the war. He published after the war a 
book, "Philosophical Problems and Currents," critical of idealism. 
The most prominent among the younger mathematical logicians in 
Poland is Andrzej Mostowski, who worked in 1948-49 in The In- 
stitute for Advanced Studies at Princeton. After his return to 
Poland Mostowski declared (see Ruch Füozoficzny, Vol. XVII, No. 
1-3, 1949) that America was now the center of logistic studies. 
An outside observer might gain the impression that Polish 
philosophy sprang from the head of Twardowski— a little against 
his will — in füll logistical armor, like Pallas Athene from the head 
of Zeus ; but as a matter of fact the flowering of symbolic logic in 
Poland between the wars paralleled the activities of the Vienna 
Circle, was related to the teachings of Russell and Whitehead, to 





those of Ludwig Wittgenstein, and to the Society for Scientific 
Philosophy in Berlin under Hans Reichenbach, and was influenced 
by Gottlieb Frege and E. Schroeder. The German modeis were 
quite marked in this field as well as in others. Tadeusz Kotarbinski 
stressed this affinity in a study on Polish philosophy published in 
the Thirties.^ 

After the end of the war Polish philosophy seemed to pick up 
where it left off in 1939 and to settle down in its old course until, in 
1951, Marxism became its central problem. The Communist gov- 
ernment of Poland tried to secure for Marxism the exclusive Posi- 
tion it enjoyed in Soviet Russia, but in Poland there were no 
prominent Marxist theoreticians, as there were in Russia and in 
Germany. The leading Polish Marxist, Adam Schaff, a native of 
Lvov like so many other philosophers, was a younger man and then 
a homo novus in Polish philosophy. There were and there are no 
other Marxists of note in Poland. Adam Schaff himself described 
the plight of Marxism in Polish philosophy at that time in an il- 
luminating interview published at the end of 1953 by the Russian 
philosophical Journal Voprosy Füosofii. 

He sees three periods in the development of Marxist philosophy in Poland. 
In the first, 1945-1948, "bourgeois'* philosophy, composed of the following 
currents, dominated in Poland: neo-Thomism backed by the departments of 
theology of the universities of Cracow and Warsaw and the Catholic university 
of Lublin; the Lvov-Warsaw school of neo-positivism initiated by Professor K. 
Twardowski; the school of Wladyslaw Tatarkiewicz which united elements of 
neo-Kantianism, Machism, etc. Subjective sociology, also called micro-soci- 
ology, led by Florian Znaniecki now in the United States, dominated in 
sociology. There were four bourgeois non-Marxist philosophical Journals and 
only the university of Lodz had a section of Marxist philosophy, — In the second 
period, after 1948, a ''Higher Party School" was founded in Warsaw and a 
section of Marxist philosophy opened at Warsaw university. — The main changes 
occurred, however, in 1951, when the Congress of Polish Science was held. 
Teachers of Marxist philosophy were introduced into the philosophical sec- 
tions. The non-Marxist philosophers considered obvious reactionaries and 

1 Tadeusz Kotarbinski published an excellent article on Polish philosophy 
in Slavische Bundschau, Fünfter Jahrgang, 1933, Nr. 4, p. 218. This maga- 
zine, which ceased publication long ago, was edited in Prague and published 
by Walter de Gruyter & Co., Berlin and Leipzig. In addition, Kotarbiliski 
published an article, *'La Philosophie dans la Pologne Contemporaine, " in 
Synth^ses, no. 137, Oct. 1957, 12'°' annöe, Woluwe-St. Lambert-Bruxelles. 

Professor Wladyslaw Tatarkiewicz published a longer study on Polish 
philosophy in a series of pamphlets dealing with the history of sciences in 
Poland and published by the Polish Academy of Sciences in Cracow (purged 
and re-organized by the Communist government in Warsaw). 

In addition the Polish scholarly Journals such as Naulca PolsTca, Mysl 
Filozoficzna, Studia Filozoficzne, and Ruch Filosoficzny carried a number of 
articles dealing with historical aspects of Polish philosophy. This material is 
very extensive and cannot be mentioned here. 



enemies of people's democracy were removed; others were assigned to sections 
of formal logic where they could not influence the ideology of the pupils. An 
Institute for the Preparation of the Scientific Cadres began its work with two 
sections of dialectical and historical materialism, and of the history of the 
philosophy of government and of philosophy of law.— A new quarterly led by 
proven Marxists, Mysl Filosoficzna, was founded and the classical works of 
philosophy in Polish translations began to be published, newly edited and 
provided with introductions. The Communist philosophers are led by the 
directives of the Party. 20 volumes of the works of Lenin and 13 volumes of 
those of Stalin were published in Polish. The Polish Marxists are encouraged 
to write original works but they meet with great difficulties because the only 
Polish material they could use are works of *'bourgeois" philosophy which do 
not agree with Marxist methodology. Investigations are conducted concerning 
a history of Polish progressive philosophical thought going back to the 13th [ ! ] 
Century. Attempts are made to convert bourgeois sociologists and philosophers 
to Marxism or to unmask them. They are invited to discussions in Mysl 
Füozoficzna. As a result a number of younger scholars, especially docents, went 
over to the Marxist side. 

To this authentic Interpretation of events by Adam Schaff 
I would add that the silenced non-Marxist philosophers got their 
retirement benefits and were permitted to write but not to publish 
their works. Among them was the eminent historian of philosophy 
in Poland, the above-mentioned Tatarkiewicz. The logicians were 
left unmolested. The seleetion of the classies of philosophy was 
made without party bias, although the editor of the coUeetion, Irena 
Kronska, has Marxist sympathies. She is a pupil of the prominent 
phenomenologist and disciple of Husserl, Roman Ingarden, pro- 
fessor at the University of Cracow, who is also a pupil of Twardow- 
ski. Women play a more important role in Polish philosophy than 
in other countries. Among them are the learned Irena Gromska, 
who translated the Nicomachaean Ethics of Aristotle ; the logicians 
Janina Kotarbinska (wife of Tadeusz Kotarbinski) and Maria 
Kokoszynska; the historian of ethics and sociologist, Maria Os- 
sowska, wife of the sociologist Stanislaw Ossowski; the teacher at 
Cracow University, Izydora Dambska ; the Marxist Helena Eilstein ; 

The editor-in-chief of the Marxist Mysl Filozoficzna was Adam 
Schaff and one of the members of its editorial board was Leszek 
Kolakowski, one of the ablest men of the younger generation. 
Schaff is a fertile writer and published among other things **The 
Concept and the Word/' ' * Introduction to Marxism," **0n the 
Question of the Marxist Theory of Truth," and *'The Objective 
Character of Historical Laws." Schaff is a critic of the theories 
of science of Windelband and Rickert and their distinctions between 
** Geisteswissenschaften" and natural sciences. 

When Wladyslaw Gomulka came to power in 1956, profound 
changes took place in Polish philosophy. The attempt at forcible 






Marxization of Polish philosophy was given up. The retired 
"bourgeois" professors were reinstated. The publication of non- 
Marxist writings was resumed. Thus Tatarkiewicz could publish 
the third volume of his ''History of Philosophy" and just recently 
the first volume of his ''History of Aesthetics," valuable scholarly 
works. Tatarkiewicz received his philosophical schooling in Ger- 
many but was also in touch with the Lvov school of philosophy. He 
was and is professor at the university of Warsaw. 

As the new liberal policies took eifect, Mysl Filozoficzna ceased 
publication in 1957 and was followed by the bi-monthly Studia 
Füozoficzne. While the editors of both Journals were more or less 
the same persons, the editorial policies were markedly different. 
Mysl Filozoficzna stated as its program, in 1951, 

the struggle for the permeation of Polish science with the Marx-Lenin world 
view; creative development of Marxist philosophy in close contact with the need 
of practice; popularization of the bases of Marxist thought and action among 
the broadest masses; struggle against the remnants of idealism which hamper 
social progress, against bourgeois philosophy, against the destructive phi- 
losophy of imperialism. 

All this sounds militant. As against this Studia Filozoficzne 
stated programmatically (1957) that the Journal would publish 

contributions traditionally belonging to the philosophical disciplines, namely, 
in the fields of the history of philosophy, logic, epistemology, methodology and 
theory of sciences, theory of morals, aesthetics, theory of culture. The Journal 
is interested in the problems of various sciences, of natural and humanistic 
sciences insofar as they have philosophical significance. It wants to open its 
columns to various vital currents and philosophical styles of the present time 
within the limits of rigorous scientific correctness and rational thinking. 

This program was fully implemented. The Journal carries an in- 
teresting conglomeration of non -Marxist and Marxist articles. 
There were other Symptoms of the Gomulka thaw. Kazimierz 
Ajdukiewicz, for instance, published in Nauka Polska (Polish 
Science) an article where he defended vigorously the freedom of 
science and warned especially against the imposition of any tactical 
party line on science. Adam Schaff mellowed considerably. He 
lectured in 1958 as guest professor in Beigrade. Leszek Kolakow- 
ski, who became editor-in-chief of Studia Filozoficzne, published in 
1957 a book ''Worldview and Everyday Life" — a collection of 
articles printed in 1955 and 1956 — where he states in the preface : 

The observations contained in this booklet are prevalently although not exclu 
sively devoted to the degenerate forma of Marxist thought that have under- 
mined and destroyed the creative cultural values and the inspirational power of 
this doctrine; to a critique of a nihilistic, primitive concept of philosophical 
controversy ; f urthermore of a drill sergeant 's concept of intellectual education ; 
to the critique of a conception of morals as a tool of great historical processes 
(in the article entitled: **The End Justifies the Means"); to a critique of a 



pohce-hke theory of freedom; to a critique of a vulgär Interpretation of culture 

according to a scheme One article criticizes the really not very Marxist 

concept of philosophy as a methodology or synthesis of sciences. Another one 
tries to present humanism as a theory of morals, namely, on the basis of a 
critiqne of the Catholic world view; another one tries to describe the main 
charactenstics of one of the forms of socially effective irrationalism : anti- 
semitism. Finally, the last one which gave to the book its title tries to point 
to the possibihties of a contribution of philosophy to the conduct of a mean- 
mgful life. 

It might be added that such critical and polemical articles are 
by no means typical in Polish philosophy but reflect the particular 
mdividualism of their author. 

Kazimierz Twardowski founded in Lvov a Journal Ruch Filo- 
zoficzny (Philosophical Movement) interesting because of its in- 
f ormative contents : a bibliography of philosophical publications in 
the whole World, biographies of Polish and foreign philosophers 
and data about the personal composition of departments of phi- 
losophy m Poland. Its publication was suspended from 1938 to 
1948 and then again 1951-1958. It has now been resumed under 
the editorship of the most faithful pupil of Twardowski, Tadeusz 
Czezowski, Professor of philosophy in Torun, and a logician. 

The Polish philosophical diet was always a little unbalanced 
in that the non-logical branches— ethics, aesthetics, etc.— were 
meagerly provided for. On the non-logical side of the fence is the 
already mentioned prominent supporter of phenomenology, Roman 
Ingarden, who published long before the last war in German '*The 
Literary Work of Art" (Halle a/S.). After the war the Polish 
Academy of Sciences published, in 1947 and 1948, his Standard 
work, ''The Argument about the Existence of the World," which 
deals with the question of philosophical idealism and' realism 
These two volumes are some 1100 pages long; a third one dealing 
with Problems of causality is in preparation. As Ingarden is an 
Opponent of positivism and is using— at least basically— Husserl 's 
method, his position in Polish philosophy is rather original and 
unique. As one of the not too numerous Polish aestheticians he 
published, in 1958, ''Aesthetic Studies" in two volumes. Ingarden 
is a consistent Opponent of aesthetical relativism. He states in his 
great epistemological work that he began it in 1918 when he saw 
that he could not agree with the basic idealistic position of Husserl. 
He worked on it alone and unaided during the war, when Polish 
scholars had no access to their libraries, at a time when '*an un- 
shakable moral basis" was necessary if one was to master the trials 
of a war in the form which it assumed in Poland. 

Maria Ossowska, nee Niedzwiedzka, a pupil of Tatarkiewicz 
and Kotarbinski, works in the field of ethics, but only from an 






empirical, historical, and sociological point of view. She is in- 
flueneed by the ideas of Max Weber. She has written "The Basis 
of a Science of Morals, ' ' a theory of moral values and norms ; and 
a psychology of morals entitled ''Motives of Behavior." In her 
last work, '* Bourgeois Morals," Benjamin Franklin appears as the 
paradigm of specifically bourgeois morality. Two other types of 
bourgeois morality are mentioned, one represented by the Italian 
of the Renaissance period, Alberti, and the other by the writer of 
the French Enlightenment, Volney; but in the former bourgeois 
morality has Clements of feudalism and of love of art, while it is 
tainted by hedonism in the latter, so that in both cases there is a 
lack of **purity" of the bourgeois mentality as it appears in 
Franklin. We see here that, to her, bourgeois morality is a class 
phenomenon. She considers ethics as an empirical science that 
investigates social phenomena. 

Here it may be mentioned that the husband of Mrs. Ossowska, 
the noted sociologist Stanislaw Ossowski, recently published a book, 
''At the Bases of Aesthetics," which is considered as one of the 
best books written in Poland on this subject. 

Catholic philosophy is represented in Poland by Stanislaw 

The future of Polish philosophy depends on political develop- 
ments ; but the intellectual climate of Poland has been at all times 
during the last 15 years more liberal than in Russia, and it is a 
safe guess that, left to themselves, the Poles would continue their 
intellectual independence because it Squares with their national 

Max Rieser 

New York City 


MORE than half a Century has passed since Twardowski took 
over, in the autumn of 1895, his duties as professor at the 
University of Lwow, and 10 years have passed since his death. 

1 This is a slightly abbreviated version of the introductory article of the 
book by Tadeusz Czezowski entitled " Philosophical Prelections" (Odczyty 
Filozoficzne) published by the Scientific Society in Toruii (Towarzystwo 
Naukowe w Toruniu), Contributions of the Philologico-Philosophical Division, 
Vol. VII, Part I (Prace Wydzialu Filologiczno-Filozoficznego, Tom VII, 
Zeszyt I). The translation, from the Polish, is by the special editor of this 
issue of the Journal. 

Tadeusz Czezowski is the editor of Ruch Filozoficzny, created by Kazimierz 
Twardowski and mentioned in the text. 



Fifty years are a long period, and we have lived to see since then 
two changes of philosophical interest: one occurred in Twardow- 
ski 's lif etime ; the second one — af ter his death — was brought about 
by the last war, although it was already prepared during the 
pre-war period. The end of the 19th Century was the period of 
psychology in philosophical investigations. This was perhaps an 
echo of the principle already prevalent in the 18th Century that 
a critique of Cognition should have as its foundation the analysis 
of its genesis. This echo was strengthened by the fact that 
psychology was then a philosophical discipline which could boast 
of its greatest achievements concerning the scientific method of 
inquiry and its results. This dominant position of psychology 
in the philosophical disciplines appeared in the form of psycholo- 
gism, i.e., the conception that psychology is the basic science of 
all Sciences in the sense that the subject matter of all other sciences 
is given to us in mental phenomena and should therefore be 
investigated from a psychological point of view and by applying 
psychological methods and laws. Thus, for instance, logic was 
considered by psychologism as a discipline whose subject matter 
is mental processes occurring in reasoning ; its task is the f ormula- 
tion of the laws of correct thinking. The determination of the 
object of investigation of physics was also to be achieved by the 
analysis of the psychical process of Observation and by the detection 
of the objective Clements within it ; aesthetics and ethics were often 
identified with the psychology of feeling and will; and similarly 
the humanistic sciences were considered as divisions of applied 

It is well-known that this State of affairs underwent profound 
changes in a short time thereafter: psychologism collapsed and 
psychology itself experienced a crisis in its concepts and methods 
in different directions. As a result we saw a new face of 
psychology, a renewal of its experimental methods, an attempt 
at a new determination of its subject matter and of its tasks. 
The coUapse of psychologism was connected with a fundamental 
transformation of the bases of mathematics and logic; a new 
grasp of the essence of these sciences reached great depths; they 
had a flowering never before experienced. The result of all this 
was a phenomenon analogous to the previous psychologism, namely, 
a logicism in philosophy, i.e., the conception which attributes to 
logic the dominant role in philosophical speculation just as psy- 
chologism attributed it to psychology. This was the position 
of the Vienna Circle and of its neo-positivistic continuators, un- 
doubtedly the most prominent and liveliest center of philosophical 
thought between the wars. 


Main phaaes of phllosophy In Poland 


5)9 wE^T üa( ^rmm 

Ni\0t r&lkK ^7, m/t 

Poli;;»h philo^oph^ exuibltB both hlttoriaally and at the proseut 
time oartaln notowortixy cli&raoteriütloa ^viiioli aingia it out amoug tiia 
philo»:$ophie8 o£ the ^lavio natlons, It ia aaBily tha oldeat ona aüaOiig 
them and to aomo extent the aiOct varled one elaoe -luüöian philO;:iOphy 
haß beooma dootrinaii? fcrunoated In the laöt doo.*idaQir'It ia alao a 
phenomenon of transition : in the period betv.t?',}a iiia ward it /^aft 
a philoäOphy of transition betvieen the ^ontinont and th« i^ngliÄli 
•peaking ^eat with atrong emphasis on poeitiYiBm;toda3 it iz a ourioua 
aiBalgam of «larxi&t and non-iuarxi^at v^riter» \ith th^ airong, piav,Hlenoo 
of the lattor v/bo enjoy a fax reaohing freedom of expresBion. Ihe sfcate 
prints in Poiand worka of phonomeuologioal and other ''bourgeoiö' thinkers, 
workB that ooaid n«Tar been published in Haööia^Äi CÄeolioelovakia^or in 

J^aetern Grersumyt» 

'ihe fixst philotiopherb of Poli^h origiu Äitiex:^ ^^ad 

in Stirope date baOiC roaghlj to ISCO/illi^M 7^ere Icgi^ians suoh as 


Johi^innea Bnralua and Miohair'dmigif^oiri (a Joauit) •'ü'aay are atill to b« 
oonsianr^d H^ Irj-Ua Haualasaitoa wrltcra In Polnnd^the Ranai^a^uioe 
hßving >iöen tJie ''goidon age" of Poii.h oulture« :::hia ^?aa foI3ovmd b^; 
a ourioae raaoirgenoe of GOholt^ötiolam in the ri^iny oocleeiabtlöal 
aoadeiöiee direoted bj; the Jerait ordar ns « r^rult of tlie countpr-re- 
forn^tion so that ?olend prerient thr> nnu^-ial spaotnola of a coantr^? 
whera sobolaötlolaa parf^ioted tj tll th^ p!?riod of f.tiliffhtenm^nt frougixl? 
iintil ißL750)Tk4 ^/liA4^ was dW perlod of deoadeuoe and atamtition 
in Polend op3.1aa the perica of Jaauit philc-iopb,7 ^tiHo ccTitomporary 
noaarn Snropaan pbiloaophy -oelled in Tdand "philuaophip reoantlorum" 

ums vir tue 11 j unJaio n« 

Sniightonuünt v.uß» firat intro^^'Ortd bj the ordar of 

Piarlöts who •^^L^^L>^SK»H^ tho JoauTTl.It OKr-i* fron 'mno^ ir. tho forrn 

giT^n it b^ ConCtooet/ThiF. phllcecpby wea «pon oroo b^ tha 1«? ohr">pl0n 

of liberal fiailOAtioi In i^oland Jen linladecki and hi: broth^r vviio trled 
to In^roduoQ In }ol«>id t'cw philopcrh^ of Kant dr^rrc^ -*| ^v iUj brother 

CiöiÄko.vsiku.^ ^o.iU()novmV*' ^i'r«ntcwi5k5, J^ihftlt ?.nfi Jo'/jef Tr^'r^rr. 

ra««,iij:xwd»urHCH>v^ x^i'ore Jozel' i'lrenfjr t'i'^.frht fcr r* Ton^; Mii.^ 

f^cao.r a scat 

ra^j^iVic .«i^-i^eutcjf x»ul>o.ilavmk' tmight firp^t in ''.r.r,m\|t?u'r :. )rnoo\w atiU. after 
tue i^rii^ World wir in llno (Mthuenij^/ ."^r1;r«"^.7'*i rl'^o trrv forrad hla 
aui.jLv4.oi.eo lo rOLc^nxl nl'ter tlm ^r^^^in*^. revcl'-tlon o »■ t^ic l:gioiaii ?iaton 
Po3reoKx -vho had no ooniKiOticn wH-h ToI«?nd "^ror.f^- ''r>ni/iiic(i in >'iößiG» 

Jae to tbe cr/pmaclon In rmvölr, r^rtL rf^iT^'^^^^or: Ir. ^xu.^iu iiuoh 

In V^H^ w«i;. luoöG oriatGiirß v/ore iÄi^t^f^tiriorll;? oirr-o^'^ -^ :d:ulis:.t 

K#ar:^Ai i'iruvt? ainid follo\':'ed ratfi«»?; lohn 3tcv:" "C^ :IV1| lic^ro-y^t, ^paiictv 

«iBuuüii ii-iiiiciai on a i'irii; fOütia^ wae achlrrcd Jn Ivov x-der Ibo loadjr- 
MhiiJ oi' jufc*jiindcjr:i i'vardov/oki^ 'ho lnti'?r -n^a th.T on •^i'^ «•• -xl^h oClioi-il 
Of v.i>e Aui.-fx&i. tlnaaoe r.iiiisitry /ooru auc cfiT^a^:ü^3d iu /lariaa^ /u&y.^iaied 
phiI<"^i>fU; ia vi'nus. uader )^rana Brertanc (lilwe '^l^jf>«'ifrl) . Ln lci94 
tiiardav^Äii.: Dto^une düoeut of philo^oph: nt tho Vioa:^i i^nivtroit^. but# 


alreadj? ii: 1695 Uo rcoci^^u a ohXI. io -^^hc ti ivf',v of ..vcv boiric 


of Poliah d6c.ce-!ttLvov Iv^A on*d oh^lt ot p!iilccoph7 ocoupied at that 

,tl 6 b:v eii löef'Mn and aiitihor of atadioa cn i-ant '.Boialnif ^füttenXy^rg 
who ,v&si bora in th«» i^rxiböleri p.-^jft of .^ol^nd bat V^^rtenb^rp, v-fa« €> yfil»>t:u 
dixiarian who ./rote little/Pw^oPdov/nki^a aotivitics no a phllc p;Or)hcT, 
psychcloglv >« and edidafcoy beoarr^ oncilal for PoLi h intftTOPOtusl lif^» 
All olc-or philoscplv3rSl-of uh*; pra^;-^? po>*loa. \?t>To p^rtl- or •Hei*?;? 
ptiplls ef ?^a'''dcvvQkl,^i^ vae ^il.oO tiio te^oh^r of the fau^lör of modom 
Polloii Icglo Jan Lukn3iowlc?i# 

of philo ophy bnl Ne alt.o foi? ded tho fi rgt- p-^cholo<;ief>i. l^'hovr3.^,or3 
in Poland nü£^ v/^d the or^e-M' st^r of ths Poilfh Phil oop^iail ^oc^'?t7« 

ütm'^ ''Buch Pilc«oflciD.:^^n^-'^-i-'' f^^-^^-^rt. (?-llS lon^ laterrvfM w/s) 

fal and moBt devotec^ cf T-r.rdowökl»e rni^iTp^th*- lop-lc1«n *^ieß 

aino^ 1922 in Onüooti vhe »^Kv/r.rttl!ii> Fi? ocoflosr)?^ C^ n^t^rl^O ^nd 
sinoe 1935 "ötuäia Vliiloscphicci'' in Lvoy^ 

A f^pecifvl coiajaijüiorj. of thn PolJ/h ?hllc?scphlcrl t^lcolrt.^ 
la ncTv^r preparin«?: tte imVIioation of ih^ -rr^rl^f^ of rv^a^df^'-r.fc^. yti>\L5A-A|i 
lila iB.^iM i porinnoö lli^a iea^ in hi^ or1.e:^arl '?on*:.rlbrMon t^ rhjlc- 
soph:7 thau te in hU togioIrinjBr .':ctirit:'.-»,bi ^ crr-^fcrcY to ivvl'rxt Ir» 
Poleui Iho ^.v)irl^ 0.1^ üoiontifio ph. 1 c- ?? Oini? .He w?^^ ^ T">r',r^^j>^t^\dri rf 
pgjohologlam in philo oph^ and »o;..6 of hi 1 'e g rrsenblc:" nho ^^ of 
MaiQOng,bt^ aietin#rni3be:»ti l>üt\iccr: the obj^ot ji^icl the cor-t?r*t o:»' lic^a 
{Tor^t'jli»ui'?«»o). IH'/o ffe^ötö aro of out ;•> wandln.': i portan'^f> for Poii:h 
philo ^oph^i'yfche in3t«llation of Twardowaül in Lto; in ia9e %na th'? 
founiim? of th^ Lvor eoliool of philooopby and fi.) tho lir^^aiVr of 
Jan Lnlcps^lewlo« who to« flrst docent Ir. Lyott to WaroGW an.ririfj f^r^t 

World rÄ? and fehi^ foundtng of th6 ^faraaw saUool o£ piiilooopfci;? !••• 
of th« Pollr.h öchool of loftlo in tha reorgöalaod mid rapolonlK^d 
WarsaTf^VpLiikr.üiovilos atejod thcro u. til tüü occupatlon of 

ao'tO'^/l cf loel»tioa fottüdad b;7^alta{5ic\viciä nvjid developed by hlö 

oolleagne atrniblaw Lc:GTJj.ev*ivi:i und lutosr bj^ uUuir pupil Aifri^^ ^srafcl 

fno-^^ 4«ir^-llforBl&) parallol«d t!ie aotivitiae of the Vienne circlag 

aelther 'Iv^nröc-^^elri (iri Lvov) not ^ukaslöwio^ iu>t i*0Bni0walti w^re 

neopc.itlTlrt^ • Ir^ ft«ot iJnt i war doi^sitl aad iiJc ptxpiis/rath^r ide?jllctlo 

t#nder*ol$fi,3tit LiUia^l*v.vias had a otiitejipt for tjfadit^iotial - »Mloa i ophg 

©nd he thottghti «hat h'» oouid rcifortn phllo^cphy by laean« of s^j'^ibollo 

lo^:lo ©nd thna grivo it a xigoroua Qoio ntifio oharaoter.^e ^^^vol'^pcu 

such a pro{':rnv'i attÄÄtln 19ß7 »Ixx th© oona© of thia progrfir '^«rshl 

d«elfc rlth th^ problf^^n of truth •■^uf of the tradltlon;«! proMer.fs of 

phllcf^ophy - by iwittns of hie. logii-tio toola# 

i»r ,af5wo^?elre of phllo^oph;^^ ivojj^q o oatoi ati tiUo uowlj founded nnlvtr;:.i- 

tie« of '^areaw und "llrio» A Oaxiuoiia Ujiivt^röit:; wa« a.Lso orent^d In 

Lnblin T^hioh beaara« aA*>ng mth tiao thoülLgicax departroent» ftA tfiß 

univer^^itiöö of üraoow anA ^arsaw oouterß of x^ioiuiat at?xdic3# Ae 

jigain:»*; th5.Ä Poiiah philcsoi^hy in g^iceral waft ttcvrited not by f*;ir reaoh- 

lÄg rpeoulative ambltlon»? -*cxzslxsd t»*« hiitorii^n latarJclfmlois oclned fOi fdi^ 

the word ; maximallöiü- but 05 mlnlj:;iali^ai# Attor 1930 tb«» neo-por. 11 ivir^tlo 

toadcnoy becasic -probabl^» tuider thy liifiUörAOt of uhe viemia Otrol*^ 
atrongor v^d the ^erman IcgJclan d&lralQh äoholÄ In iTlmsVei^Vcrpor* 

aonal friond of Jan lüijca^^iewics oalxed roland oae of the rain csnbcrs 
of the novf Icgio In tiie world^üha pnaftlmlstio trend of exl it^nticlisn 
whioh ap^aad at w^at tlme In 0er: . ny proper nav« p<^nQt;r? roli.iid 
and thij rcrr» tru9 until tha preisont tir.e« 

On« coiaa pprh^ypc «um ap lo sayf.a/? thnt u-.^;l\ th« firot !»orl4 war 
the min Intoraat oJT Pollsh ptiiloäophy was ncbtfc? hl^torioal -aa it 
la now in Hnssia ^or otiisr ?ens<ms~ -.'/hilfi as a r^tter of dootrinc It 
lacke« prinnrj ovlglnfliit:;, Afior that it boaaiia arnntira la IorIo 
eepoolß?.!? am^ tfmt role ?7a« rsallaed/b? tha '/arnaw scJiool of phllo- 
*UU^ r^phl?» '"^^rf m» no eonnootloa batwoar. thl:j rrsnrgenas of logio in 
/tSIT »oll:,h iae4i*T£i rmd ^ezmlisanoo logio s« d»«oribea Tjy Tsjarj;!; 
StrnT« Irr. hla Uudi; '^Hiztoxy of logio as a theory of laiovirlgige in 
Polon<1 " f"?!jröf?.w,1912 ,11 ed. lonted by Ißdmisi Koterblnakl ia hl 
"La ^cgiiue an Pologne-aon Orlglnnllt/ et les Inflücnofls ^^sr-mgnVea " 
(rlam. 1959, u:(^1d Signorolli »Bdit^ovo-Puhilatiad hy Aao.itomta Polaooa 
dJ Scisnae ? Letter« -illblioth'-p.x (U Rorca), 'nh« dl-.oir>l*j of ImrioTiB^i 

Jaii'^mlca.^lfwi.rT! vaa »i^aA^'tÄWa ooiif.inaator of the fork rr 1 1 jt of 

Biodflrn lo(];3.of.aii.3 and triathasia'^.iaiauH o xoh aa Poiron,.Tcvona, ?ichröüor 

Frage ,misB0ll, '??hlbehotAd,Vailfil;i,aouturati ntid othercllo rorfcr-e out 

« rholc Eoriea of/6.7*tan& of thc propcsitlonel calütl'iB the firat 

^«xoli sjüteiü^ he-ing bc6n o-eat^d by Prspe.Ke firct Ks:sa±a±,a avitem 
of KtK^-Arala«d lügio (1980) follcv;e^d shortlj^ afterÄarda, in thls 
'leid b27y\S.L«7'oet in ■ Ho» -t^lOCD« 1 



' ifcilWW ■ I 

1) l^Borkov^^kl and J*31apeoki ,i?hff Logloai v orjtc of l/? Je^ioa. 
.^tudlr. -liOfioa, voi,»^IlI,poantiD 195G 

T#Köt:!arbiri-ki , L©. iaffiqii© «n Box gne^eee abov« 

Lukaßlewica clcipllfled aoocrdln^ to Totairbiri. ;:! the «ütiont^tio 
aystcrß cf :?r9p5, ?hlt6liC:&d,Kaöäell,[;Ul>' :cft,Niocd (?1;c^,Äiüdc«kEit 

of notaiJloa (lettexö without pcirönthd«*»)* Sie^tchin^ hi^ e;;stcn: 

of til-valu€d luglo as apcia;>t the Arlc>tiotnii/i'; a^ h« iJ^^el-^xr- 

to call tt;Äthö JhjryBipplan ^loglo -^uii<j9l<i aIoä trlcd to %Ajtij^%kt du> 

what LobaohöTBici aolilevea in geowotry« At tlie end of his lifa 

»pont In Dibli;x,Iiriaud pLTihaaiewiof. tried a relnpretation of 

Arljtotolian logio ("^A.Tistotollan 3:7lJ^x>5l3tl^fi^^ standpolnt 

Muo^ern logio* (II ediUoti,Oxford 1957) i» 

Jati Lukaoiav/ioiJ (1373-1956) who begran hlr, aotiTitl a wlth a ötudy 

"^The prlTjc5T)le of contrrdictlori In Ariatotle'* xion over for hls 

Ijcns hi: 70vmgir aollesj^ue JtaaielTöW i-esni^v/skl (1986-1839) btit 

althcu{?h both of thoia "beoprae *:?ic? i^ioöe^rs of m^^th^niatical loglo In 

Polend , none of theia waa a iBf^theimtioian b7 professloa.althougii 

.ÄiitealrTlca hsd knonl^^dP'e of higlier laathoTnatloß •Leanlowafel was 
aelf-taupht in mntüatßetica in ofar/£ to*? we i Si rnoT^tgnght in a /cv«**^e-* '^jrft 
'•8yKna»lnTn''*Cnlv their pupil Alfred '^^.raki waa not i riry philo&ophor 
btit ^9.feheaatlcjlan by profe^sion in the first "olaoe« 3tanl;-*B?^ 
loarievdki ^Torked out a c:;ßten» of prototh^ttoe^of ontolcg:? and of 
m©r«olog5.T:cidex8a Kotarbine^i rhc took ovcr p^rtB of Lesüiewaki^a 
oonoeptloii iitatoa that Lc0nic\7t-|:i oaIXad protathotioi "tfcat part 
of of logio wöOrG v>aTlaJ)loö are conatituted by fanotora^^Acoordlng 
to -.hie in la perrdü&ibie to 3Ub8titat#^9 ve.riablteY'^^The öifni^of ' 

oonjuaotion,of aitertkativc ,ö# i: plicatlon eto,J^e oalled ontologs. 
a oaiov-lv?i of naiJiea and mereoiog^? tbo studj? of ö^atloaahip of a 
fragTnent to the wholefnot of the ^'öx\^ to tha wliola. Thl'. waa 
altiO dcalt vTlth latv=r on bj lI«l«on Soodraan aooordlng to lotatblnskl^ (2) 

1^} A^'Graegbroayk, Tiie a^vstem: of Lesniewaki in rolation tio aon- 
tomporar:y logioal ro3oaroU.3tudla IiCgioa,rol»ITI#^arsaw 19ö5 
J#31apoaki^3t.Leani9w/3ki»3 Prototh- tloa ,3tudie iOgioa|Vüi^I, 
j Warsaw i960 

J*M:apooki,3t*X.0ani0../ahi»3 Caloalao of nKPiea^Jtnaia iiOcioa,vol.III 

Var&aw 195 ö 

., -atudU Loelo»- an. r.rofc„or lu '«.« »ho b.o«. .h.s 

^°Sy!,.e ::.oll=h 10«lcl«-.s p.rh.p. olo.,.t ^.o .co-po.lUvl n. 

Bhloh '»• trailäliitoa into or-J™ -"»<-i 

in iiaat-iierlin* -d t ^ *> 

„,.t..^.l„ian.. A «rj In.e.eatlu. P«=on.lU, a»o„, .=U=^ 

^ ^h.-nrnhsrs TOS ieon Chv/iatelc(1034-1944) 
«abliematioiant. and phiL.opUera ttb» - 

^(-4« War««aw he V/rote irj 13^^5 "Ine 
who v/ae aotivo in Craoov: .not in ^larsaw.fte 

^ «,,5r.nDfl« -nd beoaru, Imo^m also ns en aea^etlclHi) 

X,3.iew,^ «^ «^=" P-«^^ '■>"'' ■*" '^'^ '° S.*^»-^'" 
... a...„s ccupl.. Polana. .arn« U at p.e..nt also ^. . . 

. . ^^ äöioaoea In Waraa«. Ite prefiidont SDacußZ 
thc 10] loh Acadei.t/ of Soioftoea m ar 

-! * iw(4 «rtt of ttoi? opinion. .Ja^ca/^ 
Wsraaw aohool bat he himEelf ^^ not of 


„0 s5».ou..- ^^»- phiic.oph.r K0t,ibin- 

J „. «nlor o. .o.Uh pUilo.op.era .M«, U « — »"•« -' 

1 a panuan o, a la. .XI..0. , in A»onoa .0 .1.. .»« =^P.o.- 

i^xted ^ithioal Cultar«) or an a6no..tic (in 

V ^ 5n the semantlos of nataml l:.npuago3 cnd in 
H« 1'3 intereated in the sflicani. 

;. ,4-4«-, o* i'-nTO""? *o purely m?iterial tried a reduotioa of Ln^-^o 

, 1- T ohi^ft-^ the eleotro-tnagnetic fielfl ) 
„laUoa..lP.(eno>, a. Ptealcal o.].ct,.t.. ^ ,,,.,,,»«. 

«a ..Uod hla t.oors "»la." »^ also ao^,«»»,!."!» 

L.a....Ul »W... la U.a. .-.a. o. ooa,..i.. -vcXopoa ..0» 


frcir. the orltloisn directed Qgain;.t treatlug properties a« objeot« 
of a oertnln klnd. '^hla lai hin to t,he oon^lotion thpt It 1^ önly 
thlUKs i.9. Dhrrlcal. obj-ctc tm4 ann be looated In tlme and -paoe 
thnt «xlot in the ba 3I0 aoiuo of ukuu word# Graxiunatloal nou s whiqh 
aro not names of t' Ingo ^aTo from lli6 oorioretist; i^olnt of vl^w , 
appareat nair^s^^TfilB ajeteza 1. pxöaiaeLj basad on that fornrilf^tf^d 
bj Stanlrlaw LcöniowaM, 2 : .ttil^ouarbxiiski (born In 18G6) pTbllshed 
In 1929 "TH8 Bj^löndnts of tii^ iliooi^f of juiowlodg« , Logic and l>tho- 
dolo?v''#Hl3 epl-ta ologiorJ- ^yöv.em Inoiudes a denial of the ©slst- 
ence of flotlona l^e. of psyoliioal obJeotß,©venta,8tatefi of f^ff^irm^ 
relationshlpSjProp*'? ties eto» 

As for tha posltlviem of Zazijid^ixz AjdatelowlOÄ fborn kft:^ 1890 ) 
hla radioiil oonvcntlonolism fror- 3 f^rtlior then that of ^«nri T>olncare# 
t% prooeeda fron lirxgt^.lr tic Tirinciplda^ If^soinebodj dooa not re- 
oogiiixe fcr Inatano© the r.rlnclple of oontradiction, (liti^alewio« 
(lad aoubts about thli: pr inolple) tken lie aoes not tmlePftt^ind tM 
»#5anirig of "no'^.Thl- iß obTioao tt<^ üha raiaa of L^nguage vjlxloh are 
^ciorif pvopo.itiona and it 1. logiaally ixQpo.rilbl<i to tejeot them. 
The lingoictic apparatu:> ia ounventional tuid partlj arbitrary» 
AjdiiJciewicz opeaka of tha ''world parepactlve'' of r givcn l*>nganpe« 
dopending on t.ho ooriooptial appciX;. • ot that lang^iape* 3ut thia 
World poripeotivo ä is a oolieolion of propOGitlot^ about the vorld 

not tho World itaelf • man we ohange i;ho lingai^tio apparacui. w« 


i-aaLl Uave othcir prcblcno or lueu^ioue and other aaiiitloa- or an^vr 


buu all thie will not 

^he v7orld#?rop03ition3 aro dependent 

Vio^ oul; on experioncö tflit on langxAag^.vionventionallsa I0 nelth^r 

reiütio nor noulnGliatio . inoe rolaw un.< nonlmllBin dei>end on thf5 
cdoptcTd lanfjuage* laoaiiaiijhow^^duoö not c.peak oboiitf^ihr v;orld brt 
about tho ocpaiition of tho world* 


The flo..eriu€ cl ^cxi U philo opti, wau «^»^'^/i' on^peraUoled 

viotium laootl;/ oiTUi<-^,U3lf of uhem efehnio rolöa.UulI oi" tbea 
dewa.iha hi^toriaa of X« phUocoph? «lad7nXavt 2ata*Jci«wioa; 

"a 7 ry great p&rfc üf ths jouager genoratior. peri^tx«d iu baVixo 
or mre mordcrod la CcrrJan oarrrpd.a Ter? » amnoar OJT .oie;:t,U.o 
WO*k.^hopa, .librrfir.3 -^«r« Aevaatat.d.piaader.S .rt-acd U 

add«d .hat all hijhor odäoa' ion ^.r.e aboliahed iu Polimd.all a^i'/arsi- 
ti,s olo..ed,23 xair :rat;i ptcf-^-raora in Lvor wero killed. iöC pro- 
f^aaora of th: arlverait,' of ^rj^oo- ;.8iit U uhe ooa3^^ta:ai.lon oau-j.s. 
Amons who.e Ulled «exe the r»hil;8ophoTa Jonoiiim £ct»limim, a 
philo«oph«r of ec.euoo^aad X^ontd Blm.t^ein.a phenonono._ogiet and 
aosth.Uüian A^ho .Arv.^itit? -^oli.h cKoiara -^ero even 
the ai;e of the oxiaiinp lib.ari-t», 

it l.f. of^^t'oic lo.aoD x^ora feit daepl^.rhe gr«at.e?27 iogiciaa 
.«^a8io«ioA^gratuei nad eo did hl. .et i portaut pupil 'iai'.i. . 
2!vo .oaiv^r.itiaa of 'Hlno and Lwov;^'.oro repl^^oed by tho»e iu 
Lodr:."rooi'.w(Brflaui .:^ 'Jorun.KotaTbiiwkl und -^Jd-akioriu. ueo^x:^ 
tue löod<.rü of iuüiu ir- :'olead,u.'oakit.T;ioa p«l.ii..h«d after tae war 
a book *- ^hlJ^ooiiijhica^^ ^^* iüoaU.E. 

^hc tao.t mportant ...,th.-ntxoal logioian ..^^apert ^a. Ajatü^iorioz 
Andrsej .-.o.tfttfaki p«rhape mor« •*« a nather.atlo.^ tLaa^hil.,«ophor , 
prcrm 1945 tili 1961 r'^liab philoscph; proaeeded «oru or i^u« ou it3 

oia lineO'-^Pit« *^^« ^-''^ ^'^"* ^''°-'"^ *'''-*^ ^ '*''"'"' ^'* SOV.n-m.«nt. 
a^he )movvn<|fi^omer.olosi3i: ii«aa iu^ardo.x publi.Uod^.till in the 
yortißß u\70 volumeB of hi© inaxn worK xa<^ tix^ •--^«' ***•/ 

otialrti auw paia /^iarics; ü*:c3? ooiilc not ^^OAtir^r^* to pabj,i.-!u.'^ nxiber 

of them -wöre c^rirtnaj^o t^aci'i Icgio vrhioh v/g..: aon^^ ^d'.i'ci a vtenl^ral 

-» y-^^ r- 

ii'MicQa in 

uraoo\^//v;ab i^^ft »vithoiia^ cnd a nev; Polini Aoadei.^i^ of ioieAoea f ^riN ] 

was oraatec in v^araew .^hloU to^l. otox roug'ilv 10 ; of tho pe:^£iOiii'iQl 
of uiiö cid AoadQiayrfQC^wieniüors v;ere appointcd Tb^? tho gov: fjoi^i^'atii 

oleaa nui nii^^l " iin ' ji'll' .;aro acti ♦i^oleated ^xT SIXT) \ ^"^ ^if^^/^^^^i^ 
was Uy^l illoaofiozaa'* (i'iiilosopiiiaal i'hoTisht) mxd^r tii«^ 
•dltordaip of tut* laadiag Püliou .>airxiöt Adam 4c.lx;:.ff •H vvoö 
to prOiLOto atjd diasäoc.inr.t^ icry5-ßt theor^^* IS aPi>ared frc::i 1951 
tili I957sOno of tho mcnbcra cf thc ö(Ii^Ojfltil staff .ms Le.^sok 
KolcJiOwrJ-i n tultntoft j-cn p philoBopher ?/iio bt^osmo Vnc x in leMt 
year« aa ohiof Uarxlot rcri^^ioni^ t;* A^dam Selxafr hlfa-.t'lfvve^f' rdcldlc 
of the rot;d ^^zTxl\,t j(g^v,\'VAi hin ^^iüloctioal rraterlalist ^Ätojiri^-^teadied 
le.ter or.^It; ehoald be tmclerjjtocd thrt o\'nn thi^: |i:fx:Uifibaaf /epreaeicn 
wä? no" aa acTf3xo in Poland sa in otlxcr ae i ii t ccuntriee« Jatholio 
philoi^opüars and tlieir orgsna wore no« ti 'C'icd obvionBlj' 5cr o^s^crtTin- 
Istlo rea^jooa dv.e to tHo pcvrer of the ohurcli; the,7 vroro also ccni:ider- 
ad lose dnnporcns than tlie liharal philoöoph<^i:o cf bcargoois CÄni^tA^^H^ 
»inee tJtiey had no suo/i inflacnce o 2olli>h youth^ 

Thi3 2rlod wa« alc.ed :In 1956 whi'n 'ar^oas'e^Ä 'JornuÄClir: )(xLXiüiy\cJL 
to po;:fjr« T^o old ph.ll03ophfre v^ere rolastiated ia tiieir toaCiing 
pot^iitions« "llytl Fiiliioricar.a'' ocHeed puolioalion di^^u d^ottier crgan 
•♦^ittidia Fllc^ofiozno" replaoc i It »indtr tix« editort>ulp of Luasok 


KolRiiowskl. 2he cjdijora ^eve nct ohanged-Adam aohsff la also on the 
board of J wiiaia i^ilozoxlogne » so maoli aa ihe poiioiea oi' the organ« 
It iti liCt paröiy laarxist anj laore biil printa i*Larxi;=ktJ and non-Marxist 
inateriul, 2iie oriterion ia not dootxinal oonforndtj bat philOöOrhioal 
aigr>lfioauoe#Il ic. UiiieTariety of contentö that niskea fasclnating 
ra.'/dln^ ad a^J^ciuat the par^^ly Uarxist "Vopror.j FiioeofÜ" in liuaaia 
or "i:ecAjjo.w 4ieitaohrift für Phiioßopaie'* in i5ast-Berlin, The aaar- 
terl;y »*3aoh iUloiiofioasny^ fcunded still Idj Twardowaki and edited by 
Tfideuss ' «jjiuovi^öki. in Torun^ was ailowed to rsö'ime piiblloation.Ita 
ourrant bibliographj^ oov'^ra philooophical publioation« in the whole 
World .It alöo o^ir/ies '^alf-annou cemsnta" of aaiihcre of lectares and 


tlia aiiicf 4.iarxi8t in Poland,Adam ^ohaff , a nativö of Lvov, 

waa unknovvn böror© the itocond v/orld war o./in^; to his ■/oath^ A fortile 
wrltcr ho ic tho aathcr of a number of books ,for iastanoe , The Con 
oep t and th e Word , Gu tue atione of ...arxiat theory of truth. The Ob- 
JectiTg Char a otfer of historioal Iaws . Like the Hun^ariau Klarxist 
Georg LuJiac3 and tho liberal Ainßrioan i-i-aario^ Manut^lbaum he oritioized 
the ?ocallöd öooiolog^? of aoienoe of iiarl UaauUeim; he also orlticized 
tLe idiographic thöor^ of scieuoe of ^luauibarAd and .liokert but 
ahov.'S hi;s balancdd Judgaient in opposing tli^ "^auoli^hment'^ of the 
prinoiple of contradiction preaohed b;^ oberen ^hajiadtio *-ar:wl.it3« 
In hia lateat pablioation '*Introdaotion to aen^tioa (puüli^aed also 
in an iitxglioh tranalatlou (?Qi*ca:ion Preaa^xlevrf i'or^ ,löu2i he ^hocd 
a tolerant attitude «rare in the oomnuii^t -joria- ^gitx toward the 
analytio philcbophy of England and Ara^rioa- without deviating^ho- e\rer. 
from his devotlon to 1^5>rxlst principles. kz oht diicötcr of the Inati- 
tute of Philüscphy and Soclolog:; of the loli^h ACbdouiy of ^joicnoea 
(and prof^saor of phllORophT; et the Waraaw^' Schaff ia tcdaj 
politioally and adiüini^^tratively the moot infiaea;#ial figure in pnilo- 
aoph,7 in Pol and ♦ 

12 \ 

fv^o ±x prominent thinkera of the pre-v/ar generation of philosopher» 
and onlj mrginally Intereated In logio are Horann lagarden and 
Wiad^ai-av; Tatarkiewioz. Homsn Ingnrdsn (1003- ) was a dovoted pnpll 
of :;draimd Husserl .Hia irmln fiold are aeat-lietios arui laetaphyalcs. 
Belüg c "realist" in nietaphsüioa he differs from hia beaoher Huüserl 
In this roepeot .«Üa mo.t iroportatt philo-opliioal werk "Arg-xmeut 
about the exiütenoe of the world" oonb^ao a critioibm of Ideallstlo 
epiatemologj. He worked at It dnring the aocond vvorld war when 
worklüg intelleotuall? -aa he avers himseif in thia book- was 
airaoi impo.Biblo for a Pole. A oollective editlou of the «ritinga 
of In6>:rden is being publiöhed bj the Sttito Prinbing offfloe of 
aolentifio pablicatlona in Warsaw. As a aupportar of the phenotr.enology 
of ilusoerl , lagarden baoane known in Germns in the 19ä0ieB as a 
result of hla werk on aasthetioa 3,>.s litorariaoha Kunatwer^ «l^oh 
7«a receatis ropaollöhed in Tuehingen,".'cat Genaany. 3« Wiih regard 
to the "ontology" of the werk of art Ingarüen diatingtiishea within it 
a ntunber of atrata suoh aa the aound, tha verbal ©eaning.the objoota 
od representation etc. 'Jheae etrata rnry in nmnber aooording to the 
art m aneation-litorars v/ork.reprcEontational painting »abatraot 
palnting. pure muaio etc. Ingnrden is a boliever in the ob^eotivo 
validitj of eaathetio valuea in the v;ork of art, Jhere are eome 
parallels to this theory of multistratifioation of the «ork of art 
in the theory of Stephen Peppet (profesaor emeritus of the TTrdversity 
of California) and of oouree in the work of the Geman philoaopher 
Hioolai Hartmann but here the priority bolonga to Ingarden. Ao 
Ingarden's philosophioal attitade did not agree -ith the main trend 
of Polieh philouophy before the vvai.Ingarden oomplaiued that hig 
work met in Poland wlth "bratal indifference. 3ut thi. haa ohanged 
sinoö thon. Ingarden naa for aome time teaoher of German litrratiire 


aow approaohing retirament he teaohea philoaoph;i; st tiie üniversity 

of Oraoow ,hio native oity« IIlü maln aeathetioal werk Dos litercrioche 
haß nov; been published in V/araaw in a Polish translation^ Therc 
apiTeareß f^lso t\7o volimeg "Studies in aeetiiotics'» fätudia z eatet:;lci) 
8 aeleotion of whioh lias bee/n alao published in Tuebing^^n« f7nter* 
öuohungerv zar Ontolcgie der ITimst)» 

Historioal studiea were alwaya ^oland^3 forte bat tfae 

eiainent historian of philoocpti^/ and of aeathetioa v^di^iairaw 

Tat&rkiewioa was not aotive/in the traditional aeat of hietorioal 

atdias. in i.*oiand-at chö 1/niveraity of Graoow-but in Waraaw ,his 

native oitj;« He ötadied ,ho\vevex,in Germany and waa frmiliar before 

tho firft \rt?orid v/ar a:^d afterwarda v/itli the maln figarea of German 

and JöVcmoh phil. sophy » Before hie reoent retireraent he v;as pr ofessor 

of aosthetioa at -^nrsaw 'Iniveraitj; «If Ingp^rdan haß frreot oonstmctive 

powera ,Tatarkie\r;ic3 ia a classioal acholar writing ;;ith groet 

olcriii;? and a rare ertdition^Iatarkiewica .as infiuenoea b^ 

Fraii^ Brentano, iristotle and aiuong his oontaiüporariea bj^ >'incit*Iband 

and Hiokert. i'atarkievvioz regained bis teaohing po.>ition in 196 6 

after GromTKtka'a aocese to povver. IIo oould pubÜLili thereafter the 

third volume of hie Ili.tors of Philosoph;? dealing with rr.odern ti e&^ 

An ethioal study "On Happinosa" »vhioh testifie^ tc hi3 aerenity of 

mind al::^o tvppeared, iie piibliöhed thereafter hia main and most 

valuable worlc "Hictcry cf Aeöthetica'* in two volunea, the firat 

daaling 7;ith antiq^uity ,tho seoond with modieyal aesthetics tili 

the time of Dante« 2hia seoond volume 1^ uiil»iue in itb kind, 

a pionearing textbook of medieval aeathetioa« i'atarkiewioz is now 

working et trfc third volume for whioh he oolleoted M^'^^ the 

materialafcRiring hie sojonrn in the United Statoa (1962)« 

Izydora l)aiiibska 

A feilow hiito 

rian tcaohing at the university of Crpoov/ - 

one of the nimerour. r/onen wt^rking in Poland in the f leid of philo- 
aoph^^ voioed ge eürrt^ f g ^er admirDtion mt 


for the work of Tatartiov/loz. Aniong the wonen-philosophera one 

oould llst In Polend the v/ife of ^j?adeu3z Kotarbiniiki, Janina 
Sztojnbarg-Kotcrblnska^ euthor of a atadj; on fche theory of sigris, 
tho logician Uaria ICoko^zynaka^ the radioal Larxiat Helena ^ilcteia, 
the musioologist 2ofia Usaa^the üiütoriaii of ethioa Maria Oaeowska 
and TDanj? othera^ 


xhp known sociologiat ütaniactfew Oeaowaki -whOoe wotk on 
fiooiolog^ was recently piibÜBhod in L<3ndon - is aleo an aeatheti- 
cian. lllo work »'At the bases of aeathetios'' (ü podataw eatetvki) S^ocO^ /X 
<ls a rolativist and a naturaliut in aest;hetio8. Ho maintainj that 
the etipouaa., of abaolutö valuee in aoathetioa is rather a aooial 
phenomenon without an^^ soieiitifia basia^T-pea of aeathetio evalua- 
fcions and of aeethctic experienoea lead rather to plurali^tio 
anaworo, Ihere ie ao .:ingle üouroe of aeathetic experienoe nor bM 
singlo eeathctio oharaoteriatio.Ofesowsk: oharioterizea ^mg^ ^^^x^x^xft:^ 1 
the ld3a of ''aooialistlo raaliaia*' pervaflive in ilusaia and diatin- 

guishea hiatorioall^ speaki ng botv/een KtBKtaöJta autotclic (aut;o- 
nomouß) and hf'tf^rotello or dependent art vrhich ia and waa alwa^a 
et the acrvioe of pc-erf-Jl inetitutions auch aa the atato,the ohuroh 
• to^The great art of the paat ma alwaya heterotelio but it waa 
aooopmpanied at the f ringe« )yj amall art wiioh waa aiitotelic, 2ho 
tradition of heterotelio art explains aocording to hi|m the Opposi- 
tion of tha public to modern art aß ccntradtcting the aaored iinage 
of the art of the paat^Aesthetio valaea are not raade by philo^ophera 
at their deaka bat ^/ere davelcped by cnlturea during Icng oenturiea. 

An ablo yoang hiatorlan of aeathetica -cmd bucceaacr of 
Tatarkiawioz et the oh?tir of aeathetioa in /araaw-is Stefan LloraMki 
a proponent of a watered down sooialiot reaüam and a moderata 


idaria Obaowaka fwife of Staniaüw Oaeuwakl) ia mainly a 

hiotorian of ethioa» 

A Professor a. tb, uni^rslt, of ,,ar=a, ^aria O.sowsto .oiatoi^. 
«. an .thicl r.l.Mvi3t .hat ethlos 1. not , „or».u„ aoisno. 
If practica, aolantlfioall, bnt a .oclal ,ol,„c.. 3h, ».„Ushed 
a«.o.g other st4., n booi ca Bour..ol. 1.0^,»,^ .*loh Is not 
>b.xl.. but stlU «u.lnt,ln. that .orallt, u a corollarj o. a social 
.,.t«n. 3,nj^^n Pran^Un u proaont.d In thi. ,„„, .. ,,, ^„,^^, 
tSP. ox "hourssola- .orallt, ,.h, Prot;,,« volne» of th, p.rlod 
Pf -nllehtoninent and tlio Italien „Ibertl of th. «.„.),. 

are ^-nocjuuDt deoiared to be less pure aoeoim^na ^^ k 

i^/ure apeoimeria of bourgeois Liorals 

owirxg to tha oouditioua of thelr oountrioa and tbelr tl;,oa. 

An «,amrie of tho firat l'pe nr^ ?H9^sJJf°r?J%\^ ciednotion. 
auprcme üixeotiverit5«oi j ^nt-VC^T* Z-^ ^"® ^^'^^ ^ave aa 
nininiaatioa Of pain Ihi. ?iJi^i^°^'^^?'' °^ pioa.äxea and 

Of t,he P?ra?id if ?he a^^stSm 'Ifh?^' l''^« aiiegad soliaitj, 

System of B^ntäam is leaBt . «^«^^^f'^*'".? ^^^^^ ^'^^^^ täe 
bat it is aevemeirea u'LnaMe!« if"-' °' '^°' ob.1<,otiona 

ooJärto'al1^ncTaur\^?^aL'f tKV'innT''"%'^'" -«^» 
l3 takea up today \>3 am^riofm wrff-r« P?^'i' oentujy and 

also re^iiiie pr llol^Ta ^^" .T !^*?^ fr''^****^°"^^^^" 'i^hoy 

WS than ueed poJulItrJ o? d1c?.fK^?^ a bi-jrercliy of noeda; 
the elimination of suoS äaSi tJ«^i"°?\^^^'\^°' iuatance 

A Pltu-fiU.tlc strStu?i oj ethiS«! « «f^^^ Wiaicslblc . 
oall theu. '.tat) wouS L Je^ulJeS! "''"^"J) ^ ^^ ^'* ^'^''^^^ 

4.) "Huch filozofiozn:, " , voi. xiX,iIoa-2. Tor 

un 1959, p, 55 

in .lie oouxas of oae pobt-^ar peixod a uuiau«* 

»„.«» (ä...iaa. i. .»- ..aa»at of -«xls« t.. =.os. 

, »„ i. in. alraaöj n.entlo».a -aocänf of tto Mreraitj 
T .V -^«itov..kl who beoame knowu in the perlod of the 

< i»«4^«-in »ritio of tha praotl083 of 
öonrrtka apueaval aa a reviaionidtlo orltio 

U.rxisxa mfolaud auC .veu us . publislaod in 1958 
,i. »est 1 -poxte.nt philo.ophioal worlc ;.he in.ividaal and the 

- .♦ ^vrT.t. H»a t;he eutiuo.dea of libarty in the plxilo.opHy 
itil'inite, ^-locrtj? b^a ^"*- b""-^" 

rar r> *liiö io uo mouograpti on Spinoza» 

uhe writer »ante Mv^^^=-t^ 

•,»^ -hiio-^o«hioal laostiona aa 'laaations 
no Interpret the o;^^^xoax ^hilo.ophioax 1 ^^, ,„,,.,.p:vpic8 

of mora n^tur«. ; to *^?^^-^;;^''j^^a Expressed In tKe Itingiiage 
aQd of anturopologj , ^'^^«^L^^ ?"'■?"*.,.%!„ riV tho problon of 

„B a probler. of h'ir^;} «^^^euc-ffi .tue r _^^^^^. ^^ 

probletn of the soal as ta. P; "^;;;^^ ^^ t^^e reiaticnehip 
Problem cf ixavaan ru^taro u» tue i'^ ^^\^„ f ^ .^^ . 

-f^ ^/jT^^.5!i^t«surc outitl.d :Hhe. eia.jacipaticn 

imortelit^; thP worth of oogciticn. .u.n ^e a 01 

VW, v4 1- «v -ih^ist.ii'- oons>id9i-B iuürxism, 
the Units of fren.^cm.Kor io au .th.l.t,. .^^^^^^ 

Vhpnoin^nolc.g:? psjo'no^mpl.slo ...b . le y 

.od-.n .ond. is a Cat.olio .ho...tio .in, of Poli.. plU^c 
.o^h^ .rc.d .he faoalti.s of t.eolo,, .na .he O.u.olio 
Univpralt;? of Lnblin. 

X,at 00 ,ear.l... -»K,. it rea=.ea ,™t«i.v .v-.' fol^=-^-« ■"-^* 
„. x..t in nlnd: th»r. ..« In -«land „o oour.oo-.lcn „IV. .,«.»-=m 
,,U,",o,,„ ,«tll 1.« ,l"o,S. ..n» SndlviOual loll.. .oi.ol.ra t»„g.t 


a c^i.'^e ouiinooOion with Oerraan philc?io*oh:7 ,t?Gp:»ci'ai^? ios Auctrian 
VfiTiiriu;^' ; üut the latter'a mnln ropre8flntp.tivc Frans Breutauo alwhoagh 
hirafc^eii: a Crcriuifcüa ^did not bclong to the noinrt?*3ari of Gcrraau philo-» 
scpüj Dut rathur to eii anti-Kantlcn oppo itior; tc it,a ruruur 
C&tholiü priest uiid & thelst srA reallet ho sew in Zuai tiit: faloram 
of paiiw^gphioal decadenca r^nd In Oerran '^idcalieiü'* aa ab^airatiOQ.» 

ihuii vniat ;.ue f>tthor of modern Polic.h phllr aoph;/ ,i:a^imiers rwardo\v«ki 
espoucec. ^ wa& the/ Opposition winr of Gernan ph5-lo5: ophj? • 'Hie i.ame 
iB true of IcgiötioB pr«vr.lent In Poli^nd nnd cf th^, Ic&ical posi- 
tiviairi of tha Tieiiaa Oirole^both streng''.;^ opr.oaefi to Qexiusn pheno- 
meiiology and oxiatentiaLism* 

Karxl^äm in Polütnd became p probl.^TP. nft^r 1945 »It had 
not au^' aeep infiacnoe on Poliah thought beforo t[u:.t au4 its 


pxöiitige among loliah intelleottials Is donbtfiil cven today« 

rr^ay paif lip serTioe to it aa an offioijil rtctQ *:-hilo..oplii » 

But a lAarxlöt wing of Poü^h philoBophT? hae htcr or?at€d 

and t/^iag uo whe polltioal oironm^tFCces the !iLarxi:ation of iOlisii 

intüliöoiua&i life prooo^di epsoe» 

lla-< '?lo'3or 

R»09nt phllc^paiis In Poland «^4 i*8 baokground 
JI—»...M. r,>i« ^ji w k ^>»; hlttogloslis and at wha pr 

Eollsh r*- ^ Ip i l i lij iJri 11 litltT- \i ü Lil '- ^ -*-"-«"-'■ T and at wüa pre«ajQt 
tiiTifl oartgln aotewört^l5 charaoterittio» v»Uloh diugle it out ainoug tixa 
ptiilotophioe of tbo SIatIo mtiona. It Ir aaslly the oiaeat one among 
tiidoi an4 to soinö axtent the mo:t vario"? one slnce Rasoi'in philo^ophy 
lias beooiae dootrtuall^ truncatcd in the l^st aeoaies» It i^ also a 
ph>;Homf»non of tranaitlon : in the porloc hetween tho wara it wa» 
r^ rhilo.^.ophjf of tranaitlon b«t'.vee^. th© kontinent and th^ l^nglith^ • cet v/ith ^trong empha&iÄ ou po.iitlTl3m;todsS it I3 a o^irioua 
aPialgaau of arxi&t and ßon-^. nrjBiiÄt . lit ra ^ith tho c^troag preyaienoa 
of tho latter v-ho etijoy a fat reaohing fraedom of ©xpröwioa, The statt 
prltotf. in roienti worka of ph^^uomenologiorl *uid other '^bourgcola" thlnkera, 
TKorlLß tUat ooulfl nevtr b6ea pubiishod in i^u.'i;;,sia^Äl Czec- iOs>lovi-iLia#or in 

t»a&tatn yrermany^ 

'l'he firat philo, cphcra of Pollöb origiti wldoly rtaä 

In .aropo date baojc roughlj to löOO^Jheaa %tx% logioiana anoh aa 
Joharu^€f» iiuraiu» and UlohaJ. imitieokl (a Jö^aitl.The^ arij^ ötili to be 
cioni>ldorod ao lato Banaisbanoe writi^ra In Poland, tho Bonaii aanot 
hü/l^i^^ b^eu uh8 ''gold^tn r^ge" of Polluii oulturo, This was foUtv.jod by 
a ou.tiou,ä. re^ATgenoa of aoholaatioiain In tho raaiiy eoolf^aiastloal 
aoad©fai<5a dlreoted by tho Jeanit ordar as a result of tba countor-re- 
format^ion ao that Poland praaent tha nnur-inl cpcotncle of e ooantr:? 
whero eohoiaatioian pcraiatad u til tha p<?r1od of Snlightenrnent froushlj 
tuatii »i750)-|'^^ Tri*' ''^''^* ^** parlod of deoadenoa and sta^tistion 
in i^olfiind oallod the pt&riod of Je;..ult philciiophy while oontönmpoxaxy 
modern iStu'Opa^m phlloc^ophy -oalled in Poland ''philcacphi:! recontioram^ 

^5jca rlrttially nn3aio m. 

:Mlightenment waa fiLrau introrVioel by the Order of 

Pinriats who a3wi%<rthMr tha JaauitY^Itonme f rom -^^ronoo in tho f orn) 

giT^A it b:7 Jonciiroet.Ihis Dhilobophy »ii»a »ponserecl by the lay oharapion 

of Mbornl adftcatlon in lol&ud Js.n anladeokl ar.d hl. brothsr who trled 
to lnt.roauc0 in lolftud the Philosoph? of Kant lepraoattd bj hlj brother^ 
as obscurantiat. A pariod of r:oEEn1;io phil.iophj iafliötc«d mo^tly bj 
Hegel arii Jüdnt ichsllia« follow« mlxed with a üative liessiaaiam m&rkea 
by atioag aational con:iOtati«as.The lattor oe/Älst«4d long luto th« 
aeooxid half of the ilX oeatury .T*«S-^«t('W57r äoeae-Wroaalci, ooav.t 
Cleaakc.vaAl, Goliiohov;9i£i ,Ir«.itow»il,Libelt and Jo.i5f Kreiuor. 

In th« aooand half of th? XIX oatttury Poland had oaly two ioliah 
universitios ,:iiox& philu.uplx.? waa taugbfc - both aitusfcöd in ths Aaätriai^ 
part ii! l'oi^aSi : In C/aoov» »ad ivov- T.!i»la the aaiTaraitj of »arsaw .vaa 
ruäaifiüd.Craoow *here Jozel tt«»« taaght f-or a loüg tlae - boaame a aeat 
of aiöiniv uifctiorical learnir.g »r.ä cc-aaerTatJLam^ philo sophi-aasa. Seme 
Poiißh philciophera taught la Buesiaa kmmm ^Sst^^ itrava .an iiaali^t 
and hlotorlon of logia In Poiand taaght in Äarsaw »täe pailosophor of 
law »ud moxal« iaoa !?atr*a;;oi;i taagtit in 3L.P8terabur5;tka Platonlji; ^oid 
BjBtio viluoentj Latoalawski tftugtit firat in Kaaan.fcheü in Craoow aad after 
tlxfl farit World war in 'ilno (Lithuanla) .PQtrazsok aleo trarujferred Iiia 
»ativitloa tjo Poiand aft<?T fc he Sa sei an revolution but fchfe logician Piaton 
VoÄeoki -who had no ooimectla^ v?lth Polcjod proper- romrlneö in xsusaia, 

»ue to the«aslor in Rtiasia cnd repreealon in Pruäsla maoh 
of Poli^h Philosoph? «»• «oi&e bj? amatcar« without teacäiag poaitlons. 
In Warsaw thos« amateura wer« diametricall? opposed to the Ideaiiüt 
Henryk atruve and follo.«;*a rather John Sta,vard kill, Herbert dpenoar 
or Augubta -ojita. Hcjarer ,the reform of Poliah philoöophy ,it» 
eatabliahment on a firm foctlng waa aohiavad In ".voir ander the lead^r- 
ahip of Kaaimiora Twardoviakl. he latt^r was t:io soii of a iiigh oXfioial 
of the Atti-.triaa financa ralnistry ,born anC. eduoated in Vicnria i*» abudiad 
philoäophy in Vienna ixnder Iran« Brentano (llke Uneaarl). In ldsJ4 
Iwaidoweiu. beourna doc^mt of pfcilcsophy et the lUaiMx 'JniTtraitj» but 
alreads in 1895 he reoeived a oail to th«. lu.ivcriiitj; of Lvot being 


tl:.» bj an Idealist aud a-ithor of atijdü«» on ilant risclalaw ■^'.irtanbftrg 
who v/ae bora in utie Pruaaim» partj of .'o;.arxd but Wartenbers was a rslotn 
dlnarian wuo wrota littl«»2\vardowalci«« aotivltio» aa a phllosophir, 
P«yohologiot and •JjJo.^äOjf yoame or^ial far^Pollh Intennsoftiiel Ufa, 
AXl older philosiophor» -of tho pre>CM pariod ver« pr^rtjl^ or hoH? 


pupils of iwa/dowaki.iie wai 

vas alüo the teacher cf tho ft-.Jii^c of :nod5rn 
Pollöh logiQ «/an Ltütaalenrioz, /) ^ 

Iwardowakl lutrodieed ia 4 

the Booallcd Auatrlan aöhool 
of philobopliy but ha aiio fütt..d«4 tUe fiiat piyciiological lal oratior;/ 
in Poiahd aud »as the ortjanizör of tlje Poli' h PhilOBophlcal 3ooißty, 
Tho first orgaa of i?olish phUoaophy m,»,ti0.^erer fcnndfid in Waraaw 
by Wladyaiaw Werjho (1898)^Eter Ai mi ffimrdovvski fopudcd hie o\m 
Organ "Riioh i-iloiiofioany^yhioh ii^pear« fwith long^ntcrruptione) 
Ti tu now.i'oday it is, publit-hed in Sortm .Itjo editor ts th-^ moat f&ith- 
ful and xaoEt devote, of l'v.nrdorakl'ö papil«,tlie lo«iöl'_i<j ^.'adeaaB 
C»a»owaki .%> riay add tJict cftcr tho fj.rst wcrld «&r thore arpaered al-o 
3inM 192:i in ür-aqovj tbe "Kwartfi-nifc FllozofloEiiy'' (rhil^uatcrls) and 
■ino« 19S6 "atadia Philoeophlca" in Ltov, 

k apeciol cocwleaion cf tho PoÜBh i^ilOw^hiOdX Sooioty 
is aowr prepariag tiw pribllo&tioa of tU.j worlts of 2w3jdo«3}ci ^-^--^^rrT, T^V^ 
hia msin Import ano 9 iiflo Xaas in his original oontrib-itlon to Philo- 
soph.? tUan la in hia taeioliing aotlvitiöa.hiß »udeavor to implent in 
P<a.and the ipirit of aoiontlfio -h'losophy »H« «ft« a repraaentative of 
payoliologlsm in philosophy and som« of his Idaaa r<*aea"bl9d thoae of 
ttelnongjha diätingui^bad b«tw9-i tha obJ-»ot t^ad tha ocnteut of idaca 
(yor8t»ilang«n) . T\so f.oto wre of ouiatanding l portnaoa for Pcliijh 
pfailoc opj^ :^he in»^tiillation of Twordowaki in Ltot in 1893 and th« 
founding of tha Lro^ aohool of i^liilosophif and 3.) tha toaüa:!rir of 
Jan Lnraaiawioa who ma flrat dooent In Ltot to Reu-aaw ciuring the f#rat 




worl4 «a» Mxd the founding oj.' tlx« Waraaw «ohool of phlloüophy i.t. 
of tae Pollsh sohool of logiö in tti« reorpanlzed aad repoloaiaed 
Warsav» UriFerats.I.uJiÄ8ie*io2 otaj/ed ther« a- tU the oocapition of by tlie GatMUia duriag the aeoonl *orld v/,-^r,-Altuoa5li th« 
soaooi of logibtioa foavided bj iiai.adi«*io» and d«\olci>ed ia^ -i^ 
oollaagiio J-u... -. law L.aui^waki <uid lata» i>s tiioir i>nsii Alfrod 2ar«Jtl 
(no. in •Jn:.iforuia) paxalioi*d tu> öOtivitie» cf »Uc Vion^ö Jiroie, 
naithu/ 2.«l-aov9ici (iu Lvovi ao» -ukdai«^ aot i^aeuie.aüi «sT« 
ii«oi.o.iulyl'.tfc. la fuüt, ^ks •i.iord^waJci aad hi., pupiWrewhcr ideeiiatio 
ttr.denoi«ö.Bat Lt^kauicnvioa had a oiafceupt for traditio^mi pkiiosuphy 
and tia th<5r,«ht ..... ae oouid x-afor« phil.-.opfis b? nn^a^a of 8i?iutooiio ^ 
locio u:.u uau. Biy itgrieoiouu ««iu. t.fio ohur cUr.^ d^volopad 
snoii .; : Siir^SiSg? .In tue eeusr of U-ln proßraia 'iJai'Bki 
doalii with i;Ut. proulüi. of IrutU -ou« Ci" che trttdit^ot^a probluca of 
philceophy - bj( laeavis of liiä logib'-io tool«, 

.>hen Polieh inde anu^noo ..aa i:öt,auabii.iied after the firat «orld 
mr,ne«ohalr« of philo.opU. v.Bra a «aüea at tb« na-^iy fOTXndftd «r.lT-ral- 
ti.« of ■«ramv anfl v/üno. a a.',«holiü .Jriiv.rsxts waa nlao or^ted In 

ttnl7«.raii;le» of üruooxv i.nd rae* otMitsra of 1' iOff.lik «tadirtB. As 
»vHiaöt tili« voa.h yhi-L. .-ophy in s^aeral «ae ß<u'k«d uot b:; far ra-ch- 
lüg •pöoulatlve aiubitioaa -£ox what i.n. hiatoriun ■f.tarkir.vloa ooinadi^.^ 
tha word ; maxlmlit.m- but b:? lalalnuai.«. After 1930 t>ho naO-poaitlTiaCio 
tEndflUoy broau» -probably mider the inixixanaa of tho Ueimu 


atrotig*r «od the «ariaaü Icgioian «elnxloh aoholz In KÜÄatM^a p«r- 
boual friena of Jan Loks^-iewtoz oalLed roland ooa of tha nsadn oent«r8 
of tha new loglo in the v.-orld,Th€ pe.^iiLl.iic trand of .xi.tantl.UM 
«hich .tieaö Ht thet tlre in Öe. ^ proper never penatrf.ted Polaad 
aad thli raciip.ins trua until t^e praaort tias. 

th« u.aln int.roi,;: of ^ollsU phlloaoph^ vm« zrdcskx hi.toricnl -p« it 
lü uo iu Ruasla fo. v>,.air p©a.onB- •.vhllc et e aritt«r cf flootr^-rr^ ifc 
lttOko<i x^rln;..u-:; o.lel... iäy. AfS-jr that It beoam« orentlve In l^v^-lo 
• ■i.- o'eay and th-t roie was r«Hil,e^/b/th« Varsaw oüool of -;.iio. 

/HTiT rci I, ra^idleval -:-nd «tinal« loglo at desoribad by Henrik 
3tv-tv« In hie ef.ds» -Ui.tory of loelo ,3 r theor;/ cf kno..l«dgc iö 
Polund « C^Htm^.lOlZ ,IT Od. ;3nrtod by Tndeuaa Kotsarbina:^! in hla 

r?Oi«a 1959,. angele Siffnorelli ,!!riltora.-aT)M,ho4 b? .Uoadeiuia Pol.con 

41 Sol 3nz« e L^ittare -BiD.lioth o-^ (=1 

Jan I*ulc.i8.lowios ,;ia 

Cl^ A. 

). h« d'jci^lfl of T -rdo^/ail 

"fcontlnaator of tho vvork 

k of 

■odarn Xogtolana «,j ..ath«mt:ioi«tn« .nah aa Peiroe.Jrrona, 3ch.rö,|f.r, 

yr^ga,8«3B«ll, WhU«!iA.iä,ynilaU,Joutui-.U «öd oMi«rs.3o -vorkad out; 

a whola aerias of/ i-.jteiti... of the propoUtional aalo-ilua the flrat 

Of an^^h .,.tem^ h.>,.ü^5 b.en o■^»^U^ by frago.He first .^Jj^J'* ,,,,,„ 
of «uqB-Talaad loglo (1980 1 f.Vi.r',^d stio-r.j .ftox'fj ••ds In '-hls 
fleld bj/ J,X,Po«* in Jliu,*riop M921 ) , 1) 

«—» « -»- 

■1 ■ ■ — »»»« 

ötnalu -Ot^ica, voj.,i/lll ,..-08m n lU6i ' 

5:.Kül!f.Tblni.i-.,jiai i.!UtPfeir,.viüa' , i-orka tu the ili.story of .©^tio 

Lttkf.ei<v/io« slmpüfied aaoordlng to Fot.r^Aa.Li Mio axiomatio 
ayatoma of »rege, hitehead.'taaatll.Hllbflrt.Mlood «ba., «,»^«,^ 
««jtkk«KitK.kamc»t«x«xkxt«Ä««4xJa6ir.ta Inv^ot. the Poli^h cjatam 
of not»tion flettcra wltbout rnrert.h^eia) . SVotcvIiii lii^ „iUrn 
of trl-T3ln«d Icglo aa nftpAnA the Arl itotcIlcn.or t» ü« pwferrad 
to «axl tt;jtth« Chrj^aipplan -loglo . ; ... trloi tc „..i. j_^r 

*ü«c iobaoheraki aauioyaa la geoiaucry. At 6ho eM of bla Ufa 
ap.uÄ ia Dabim.lrland .i.uJcaaiewio. tei.d « relnprotatlcn of 
AriatofllHU Icgio ("Arlatofllan 8yUoglatlo from the rtanapclnt 
of mou.rn iogio" (II edition »Oxford 1957). 

Jan Loicaaiewlo, ri878.X9fl6) who began hls «otlviti s wlth a ,t«dy 
-Th« prlnolpl« Of oontrndiotioa in Ariatotle" won ot<.t for hi. 
idM« Ma ,o«ager ooU.agu« atanl.iaw i.eenlar.'?ki (iBeö-lSZS) buL 
although both Of them baot^e the ploneera of mrthemetloel lo4;io in 
Polaad , noD* o£ tixeia wa. a met.heTi*tiotaii by profe.aion elttoiieU 
LTÜcasie^io. üad Joxowledge of highajmathematloa .Le o«.,le-:skl -.aa 
.•U^taughfe in mal;ix«mtlo. iu.ofarXs not tauglxt in u C,u^ iU 
"e^«maaium".Only their pupil Hfr.d Tar.2cl v^s not onl, philoCpW /^ 
but aatb.«atioian by profeagton in th« firat rlaoe. :)tenl i.^„ 
Lt«n.«w.^ worked out « .,«t.« of -.rotothotloa^of outoL^, and of 
«aerooio«y.Tad«ua« Kotarblnaki who tooi: orer parto of ioani. :•-.£ 
oouoepticu etat«« tixat Leaniew^ti oulloa proteth.ticß "tht.t purt 
Of Of Icgio rho.e rariahU-a .^e oonctitutcd bv f«.notora".icouxding 
to tM. if. le porndBeibia to .ubetif.tö the vari^bU b, tat- .1^ of 
oor^.uuotion.of aU«rnative ,of i..plioa.ion eto^ a^Ued cutology 
a oaloalas of nai-iea »öd aarooLcgy the study of/flatiouelüp of a 
fragmöut to tfa« wholefnou of the part t. th* *holo. 7hX, wm 
•Uo a«alt ,:itb lut.r on by N«i.on Oocdman anoordlng U £otaxbiuaJ.i. (2) 

^ti4;rSrfogiSl*r'-BL?jfS?u,?' Le.nfwek In relutlon tc con- 

STdXiidfi^ts Ajduklewicö^förnirrly profanecr at Lirov^toa^y naJtor 

Influ^iio« In hl8 ^ork ••Diu «]jntakti>: ohi? Kemxexität** f tudl* pJUlo» . 
•op|ilo«^Lvov^l9iS) ♦ AJ£nkl«wl02 la & oap^^ortar of ccavtnitlon ^ ^nm 

Aj4t3*.t4wio» wrote rtaentl:; a liandtaook of ivgio {Ücr uvaöheTß) 

»«tüamtifeio lii.n>> and phtl .optuira ;-iii Luoi ■'^k (1834^1944) 

l«»iiir^skl and thelr pupU 't'.-u'islci »Ito tl^i lo ua^üomiin ^ ^.ija 

t.*io «cTrmae oo^'vptr^ü l'olarMl» ::arftiü. i:* rvt 


r 0:? 

Fotarblnßki (öiao© 1957) iy öC«aafei;Mj» o^n^idoreä a iogiöli^n or cUc 

ü^Tca 9. T^T*l:i«ji of R Iäj rellgiaa ( txk Amüxio^ tia Bd^l i;ave «u^ >or- 
jH P pax tr^d äthloÄl CaJLtiiXt») ca %^.'a c jiiOi liio (i^ «*at Ai-i:rtcau ü*naüö<# 
Her Is intorvTötGa In, %äo ^eraat'^tii» t>f Aatinii i«iJ^aag«a aud in 
tplGtccio oß;^#^o tricu a rfdaoliiaii of i^iugti^ge to puxeij luiiwetlal 
rolt^t^lcurhipaf.noh aa phyaioöl objeoto^tbe täi»ofciO-HLia^aie»*io fiold ) 
and callfd hla theory Tülowf* or al»^ autijntiiiw,x..uö^^ ölac üouo t^UAim« 
Kotarblnoki btoted In X'JÖQ tiiai roiam ox aonorolioiu 4avjlupü4 Tiom 


of a oertala kind^ This led hlra .to.the oonvlctiou that it i2 only 
thIngB !•©• phjaloai objeota liriHiVoou be lootitea in tiine end ^pace 

that ©xlat tn '^hn boöio ttüna^i w tUat v;ord» GrÄCimatioal uoaLO wliioh 

are not a^jaes of thines ^ars frort the ooncmtlct point of vicw , 

appuröüt littJßte^'ihiv ö^^atöin I2. pr^olaoly baeCv. on that forioalatoA 

by ötuaicila^ jucanlöi«/Dl:i# 'tadeutokotarbimlci tborn in 16C6) pabii&liüd 

Iti 1929 ''Tue Äeiesaenta of uh€ Iheory of Zuo7/lödge,XrCgio and ilctixo- 
4oiosy'\Ui-i t?pi-te olugical ^jBtum inoludaa a deul^l of ihe cxist- 
enofe of flotioua I.e. of p£;yohioal objaota^ürentapetctoö cf ^.ffalra, 
roiatiouidhipäjpropertiea eto. 
A3 £oi' Vae pobiilvism of Katsituit-TÄ Ajdiikle^loss dorn iSiiti Iö90) 
iil3 rr^dioei ooiiv^jntioneii^it go^a farther thi.a tAat />f ^enri i?oinoar«^ 
It irootröda frcru Uiifctiistic principlcfc^ llfeoi.elody dco« tiot r$- 
ocgulse for in^tarice the rriuolpl« of contrridiotXoa^ (Luluiöiöwioa 
had doubt fibont tiila rrinolpl^i then h<j doea not 'Jadöir^^tarid t;ho 
ia«!^a)'lng^ of 'no**.f^1i^ ie cbvion froK'^ tUü xO^uhö of l^joagnage vvnlch art 
apriorlc propct^ttlcna tind it U loglaalls? Impoiüibip to töjeat tham^ 
Shö lingal..tic aFT^ar;tiT}- ir. oonvcntional^aüd partl;? c^rbitrurj^ 
Aj'i-t)ri«r;iOB spucka of ^he ••worltJ pora.^Ho.tivfj'^ of a giren lan^iage« 
doveuding ou thu oonceptu-a appciXt^t f, of that l?^ng\Uige» Bat thla 
üorld per;ipec'Jivo x la a oolleotion of piopooition ffbout tJie *orid 
not tu«? viorAd it^elf* ^ii^a r^e ateiifv thö llngaiaöio «pparata^ wa 
öiiaJLl kiava otiher probleiaiMÄr (luoatioiae anJ. other «aiatio . or ail3r<«Grfl 

btit all fchia will not 

the %4)rli»Prx>po^iticn3 \to dapoaocnt 

not onl on experl?nco but on languaga^^onveiition^^li^ia i:: naither 
rtl-itia nor norJ.n-llt^tlo inoa r9i3iR an] nor/dn;\j-iüm U^p-ud ou the 
adoptt^d iönf uarre. I''.Ra~i^irs,ho^f^,d'vea not fcpoalc about ^U« vorld bufc 
• about the oo^iition of tho t/orld. 


The flowering ox xoiiali pliilo.A>pli^ viuo cu.1 Uoit bj ^^ anitvralloled 
Oötaetrophe,tihii üöaoad vvcrld •^ailwiiioli o.'M^ü iv xoltmiX ülx Million 
TlatiHiS mo^^Uj olviiiana^Ualf of etUuic Polü»,hc»lf of th'9ta 
iowa/üh« hlatorian of ic« philccopbj Wladyiut^ 2ute.rki«wlc)2 relatos: 
^a Tery great part of uhe ryOüuigtr feeuvraticu peri.Ui.d In battle 
or wer« mardered In ü^^rmau oamps,a vör-^- g^c^.'^ nurtca* uf 30u>ntifia 
wortshops.ixibtilltöt ,liurarioa wer« aeraatstöa/plrnderaa .r^Tiaed to 
th« groTL'.d.*»2faaö iih« yeur l'->45 :-tart^d a ne?.' epoch' • It m/i-; be 
&da«d that ail MgUejf adEOaticn \^a3 uJO^Lhad in Pcl'.'.n^^al?, it Iv^rsl- 
tie« oxoued^ao aiilvörüit^,^ profc&öorö iu ^vov .-.uro i:ille<l, 130 r^ft- 
feasor« of the uulver^its of Jraoow öent to thti ooücmtTiotiori oamps^ 
Amtmg tho^i« kiliöd ^ore tue püii ..ophers JOGohim r^tallmaori^ a 
philosücpher of öoieaoe and jufcopld Slaasteiri^a Thanosi^no oglat »and 
aeßthetioien •i'be surv vin|^ xoliuh tuholjLXß qxo eveu fozbj.dd^n 
th« U6« of thö 3 i Utiug 111) uxi^»« 

:)eiipiou ^U tbl.. :?olir$-b Phile. opii- picke.: ap after tko^ vmr^nhor« 
it lofti ovx bxi, ih: iQcciöiJ v^er« folt d^epli^^Tha gyes.üeat^lig^.üian 
JUtüfcaslemca e?nig;'ated edd aO äid hi^j nio^t i.^ortaat papil ^fsrak • 
Tkö lost; uuivorraiUiL'» of ad Lwow v^er© replaoud bj t.Jio e in 

Lodr-> 'rooiuwOrclau] and Toriinj:otarblriski and Aj Juki .^v^ui: bt^o.^^o 
\\\Q If^a ^rj. of Ingij in :^olaad,iljdukii^wiua pabli-hec r»ffc<r the :;ar 
a hooii "Bhllo-^ophiCAl Problemg and raorei.^eijtB'' oritio??! of i(loali..a. 
5ha mc.t Imporiiant rw thöIar^tioal logiolari ^^eoame apart fron Ajdulilovloz 
Andrae,! HOt^t^oeki perlia. . xoro of a tatithemtioln thanT^hilcoopher« 
F^OTa 1W5 tili 1991 i^li'3h pliilo:!oph-? p; oo^«dod raorö ov 1 .'^a on its 

old iine« 

tö the fact that Polund biad a ooi^isia ist ^oy«rtinioiit# 

Sho ]aiown^lioiiO::.ouoic, ' t .io : a Ingard^n publiaticd ;:till in the 

f aiO'it 

Fortieß .0 TOiuiaea of hia a-in iwork ''a*!ip arfcuaürit Jtt/thü c;:i:.tono« 
of tho 'wrld." Bnt. the ?olisu govenußiut vas ii^ked o^; tho faot 


thnt dlRlflotlcal Trteteriallsm laokod in 7^1.^3 thö inteilgotual Itaderahlp 

ohalri but pnld i?.al<irle«;they coulfi not coutimic to paaü^ü,^ uoiabar 

of them wert oanj^ad to teaob lo^o rhlof: w.^.b oon3iat?.ra4 a a^utral 

l&tt Poli' h 
solenos not talnted hy fmy idtolcgy* V!ae/Ao«3.i3mj of .oioucej in 

füuaded u iririg Ihe Auötritm periodr7^ti> -n>^ 4>f^ 

CrÄoow/waa laft wlthering and a nnw Pollnh. Aoado:-' of ooleuoea / Tv^ Jy 

was oreated Ir W^Tasw which too>: orer rouf^lil:^ 40 ;q of tiie pexöouriel 

of tihe old Aondair!y»i£#|/%.e!nbers 77er« aj^p^lnte l bv tho eoverni.ient. 

Important phllosoph«r» were hit by tti«©« meac-^reo for imtanoe 

the hlstorlan Wladjela^ T^tarl^lewloa 7?.! ^oir.jin In^^^rdci.« iiiö legi- 

QitJtiQ f^di their ontpnt x^ere not molested at all. ^ ney^'^^yu /^, /? 

was oraated «Myel Pllosoficzrui" (PhlloeopMcal Thou^t) iiaciar tka 

editorahlp of the laadlng Poll^ih ?/erxlöt Ad©ia Sohaff.It was 
to promota and diBScminate Marxiat theory« It appc^red froru Ii;6i 
tili 1957*One of tha ^embers of the adltorlsl it-ff was Lec^aek 
Eoiakowaki a talonted jou g pbllosopher -ho beo^mo laio-jn in laver 
^yeara aö ohief MjirxlÄt rayiaionlgt. Adaiu 3c^^^ff himnalf waa /^'^tlddle 
of the road ^^^arxlat .«ftd oven hla dialaatloal .-intcrialißt Ssrnm/aiezü^iod 
Irter on.It ehonld be ^mderstood that avm thic. -jBmj^^^t^f rtspreüaiou 
was not a& aarar« in roland aa in othcr coHismiiiiet oouutrit;e. Outhoiio 
philoc-ophera and thalr organa wara not tl lohod obrlouely fo;p opportua- 
lötio raasona dnr» to tha poisrar of tha ohuroh;they wore alöo conjidaf. 
ad lc<öa daagorons tbian the liberal phllraophcTö cf bourgeoiG x , ipy 
slnoo thay liad no auoii Influonoe Pollah ^outh. 

Itiic oriod wne olot^ad in 1956 vhcrt 'Yl.-d-^sla^^ Jortmlka 
oaric to pa/er» The old philoöophor© wera ralist-tcft in their taaohin« 
pOoltiona* »^Mysl Pills ofiOBna** oeaaad pirblicatior -nd ano^^her organ 
"atudia yilOÄOfiaana" raplacod It uader tbe oditorcJiip of . «k 






?r-. i 

# , .,•■■. 



•X. h. 

t JU 

i i 

t.-" s< 

t kie-jj 

a» Jf^ 

om^ tliat 

•>n -llt 





t '** 

■j.i <•■ ^ 


\ Üi iit .•: !i tl J t i. <ii » il 

JL>*>-<4«A «' 



i.*^ w >0/t ^* .il-^C- 

. t < 

» '■*'*♦ 


» l 

i<w I— I W0a^mmimm 

A. • 


i^..V;. . ;n 




ia> # 

• 4.4 •* •<•■ 

i.VV %5J 

V J 

« » 

f f < 

« - w ^ . S- 

» * •*» * w ^^ 

«' '.' /< il ^tk*. u 

I. i^^tii ..JL '««4 

V ; k 

« U 


. ^V 

; i 


i j 

s > ' « 

l. A 




i' '.( • 


c i 

;jk ..*-b< V 

Qt "?U4U&* 

uf .. 



* \ 

» ••• 

.4. *,. • 

-^ ii 

r. * f 




i » 

Izydora Dambska 

i»Ox7 - 

uri'j» 4-.: • üü uuLi 

\j > 

XoJJt..«^ iu irOX lad iii uUa fi'^ia of p(lilO> 

$a/?hy Toloed rootntlJ h^r adnlratlcn sf 


tor fch« work of 7f»^r.^^• 


•Pr 1 . 

I ♦ /'■ 

u.' '•: t In 

I -f 



« t 


j.!^^> r 

• "1 

. • U. i' i* X *» 






u .Ithcut 

^i -k ■^a. 


4 % ^ •*• • » 


u oi: 

•t ., 

• j " . 1 


^ ,r.i.4,X3ti^ci 

J3 ' 


.,^'0 / v\ uurreotl: 

..üu •i.i 

!.iü: Jin- 

< k ■ 

^ Ui *bor) V- 

,.wA.-- * 

• i j 7 

fr*^ 1 '1 

. ^ 

K u<5ii * j.or. c 



et . 


tr'^r>: /^ .Oü er h^t^r'^' 




& ^^5.*j 


,.10 ia^r.n-. 


* ! 




■ V < 

An ^.dIü D' 

f^ — 

\:^cx .'x 

^ i 




. ta« W • • '^1' *'• 

Xu» Utf*lt.Ji^ a 



f » 

* »- 

X '^' 'irurM 

' Ä^älfcl- j. * ia 1 1 V i 'ä t th^^t •" i! *■■ -^ % 

■> 'i 




^uixjioallir h" 

*<■' ■ -^ \.Ki fc, 







.a;ii th/'-if; nO'»*'^'* 


•r V 

^ iS^\ 



XU i 




'>W ii^.|^*.^ i> *, ;, r:;oX yjli t 

V« J^U^iAt« 

ara :f 



h^^ ifRfi; '^^r 


M«>t CO», -j t'Si|-^ C*i* 

thi^ir nom 


•4- s* 


r P 

» » 


tf • j 

Üft t « %/. 



0tliW«f r^ 

♦« ■». 4 



■?"!'* ^ ♦ ? 


'> ■», 

'^^^ lt ^ * 


1 # i ^ 



•1 ?Tr\r. -»n »*i 

• M 



*- -«- 

^ c •;) 




« ».3 


¥\ijk,iiUO i. 


' *• •■* ••» 



,.'•^1 V»J.. 

US- i; o: 

.ii :)fl 

fi^hl^r'» 1 

ül >iüt 

Cn f'r^iiH'^.v^ 


i .4 




• -• ♦ 

• • 

i?.. «•• 


h f J - 

t%\* •iuriu V -r 


~j. »• 

l V ^ •< , , > • i 'H'g 

r^'Ä'i^.^tm 1938 ♦- 

f 1*04. i i,fc ifc»Jf i- 


;" '^ 

c<:. !!Lu4 ^ X 

rl ■ 

a * 

? ^ 



! In 


j. U 

i 'i • 

^i.1». jf-i 




.iUr- • 

" • :,■'*• 



* .i 

In iro 






« *«' A. 

vf *L, «I ' 




'O^. i. 

s.f^ t^m 

gU ^^fe 

.-^ <* t 

»f ♦•X 


5i9 WEST 121 SJR^B 

Recent philo so^hy in ^[bland and its back^round 

' ■ '"" " — - - ^, 

PoUsh nhilosophy oeHbits both historically and at^resent time cerfcain noteworthy 
char-cteristios wi-ichx aingle i^ nvt, among the philosotfi« of the Slavic lands.Tt is 
easily the oldest one araong them and to sone e->rt«^t the most v-ri ed one s^'nce he 
Fussian t.r.ilo<^ph7 has become doctrinally. truncated in the last decades ovdn^ to 
Malest nivellation. It is also a phenomenon of transition: in the period bet-een the 
wars it was a philosophy of transition between the Continent «nd the Jhpli^- s'?e-!clnfr 
West with strong emphasi« on positivism desoite its Gennan rootsj today it is a 
curious aimlpara of Marxist and non-MAiod-St thinkers with streng nrevalence of the 
latter viho enjoy a far reachin^ freedom of exnression. But for hov long? The state 
prints in Pol^nd the works of phenomenological and other "bourgeois thinkers , vrorks 
that could never have seen the lipht of day in Russia.Czechoslovakia , or for that 
matter in Ea.stern Germany,perhap8 the most rigid of then all, 

The first philosophers of Polish oripin widely read in Surope date back rough- 
ly to 1600, -hese were lofricians such as Johannes T^nrsius and ^'dcha« SniL^lecki (a Jesuit), 
Th^ are still to be considered as lata P-enaissance writers in Poland.the Renaissance 
havin« been the "golden a^e" of Polish culture, Tbds was followed by a cur^'ous re- 
surf' ence of scholasticism in the many ecclesiastical acade? d-^'rect^ by the 
Jesuit order as a res-ilt of the count^r-refomation so th^t Poland uresents the curiois 
spertacle of a country vhere scholasticism persisted until the period of Enliphtenment 
(rou^hly until 1750) • This was a period of decadence and Stagnation in Poland called 
the period of Jesuit philosophy while contönporary modern^ European philosophy -called 
in Poland " philo sophia recentiorum" was virtually unknown. 

3nlightenment was first introduced by the Order of Piarists who replaced 
the Jesuii^s in education. It c?^jne from France in the form given it by Condorcet. This 
philosophy vas sponsored by the lay Champion of liberal education in Poland Tan Sniadecki 
and his brother who tried to introduce in Poland the philosonhy of Kant denrecated 
by ms ^^ ur/as obs CTiranti st , A per5.od of Hom?^ntic philosophy infuenced mostly 

by Kepel and Schellin^: follows dxed w^' th a native '-essianism marked by streng 

nationaD. connotations as a res^lt of loss of national ind erbend ence, The latter persisted 
well into the second half of XW» the XIT Century. Such philosonh-rs vere Hoene^Wronski 
who wrote in exile in French,Courifc Ciesakovski, Gothc^owski, Trentovsld. ,Libelt und 

Jozef Kremer* 

In the second half of the XI7 Century Pol-nd hrd only twAiniversities 


where philosophy was tau^ht-both situated in the Au^txlan parb of Poland namely m 
Cracow and Lvöv) v^iile t' e university of Warsawjfbecame russified, Cr^cow v/iiere ozet 
Kremer taught for a long time philosophy at the Ja^ellonian universitlf and art at 
the Acaderay of Fine Arts, became a se=^t of mainly historical leaming and conservatis 
in philosophy, Some Polish philosophers taught in Russian ,for instance I'enryk Stnive^ 
an Idealist in metaphjsics and historian of logic in Poland taught in Warsawj the philo- 
Äsopher of law and morals Leon PetraS>^ki t*«RWr in St. Petersburg; the Platonist 
and mystic ¥incenty Lutos?l:av7Ski-- known in the V:estem world-t>-ui?ht first in Kazan, 

then in Cracow, and after the first world war in T'Jilno(ldtruard.a), P^-trazycki 

^rvn. Jfj ^ch tf^^ 
transferred after the Russian revolution his a~ctivrBr<M/ to Poland but the logician 

Pia ton Poretsky -^^^ho had no connection with Poland prx>per-stayed in Russia, 

Due to the oppression in Russia and repression in Prussia much of Polisli philo- 

sophy was done by amateurs without academic teachjLng positions. In Warsaw those 

amateurs were «ÖES^ diajnetrically opposed to the idealism of ^enry Struve and followed 
rather John Stewart Tdll, Herbert Spencer or Auguste Comte, Kowever,the reforra of 
Polish philosophy ,its establishment on a firm footing was achii?ved in Lvov und er 
the leadership of ^azimierz Twardowski, Tie latter born and edicated in Vienna as a son 
of a high official of the Austrian finance ministry studied philosophy at the univ^- 
sity of Vienna under ranz Brentano (like Husserl). Tvmrdowski became in l-^Pt a "docent" 
of philosophy at the Vienna university but recedved soon afterwards in 1-^5 a call to 
the university of Lvov, The ch^ir of philosoühv was occunied t'^ere at t-^^t time by an 
idealist and author of studiee on K^nt Tt/risl^'w T^rtenberg born in +he Prissian 
p?rt of Poland; but Wartenberg vras a valetudinarian w^^o wrote little, Twardows^d. ' s 
activities as a philosoph er, psyc-o logist , and educator became crucial for PolJLsh int- 

eTlectual life , AU older philosoph-rs in Poland-of the pre-^irst war period were wholly 

or partly pupils of Ti^rdov/ski. He was also the teacher of the father of Polish lo^ic 
Jan * ,a native of Lvov who stndied at I.vdv nniversity, 

Twa^doT^raki introdiiced in Lvov the socaUed Axistrian school of philosonhy 
but he also founded the first os-rc^ loFical lahoratonr in '^ol''n«l and was th^ orpa-iiKer of 

the ''olish Philosophical Society^ a«f(eStebli'^hed in all centers of philosophical studies 
in -'oland. The first .iournal devoted to philosopby in Pol^nd was fo-inded in '.s'prsP-w by 
Tra:ad-,g?:aw Weryho (1898) while TwardoT/ski himself founded i^^. 1-^11 his oxm T,hilosoT ical 
organ "Ruch filozoficzny" (Philosorf ical "ovement) whlch ■'s stin pnbli-'-«Kl in Torun by 
the nost f..lthful P,nd '■le-oted p-pil of Twardov8ki,the lofdcian Tadeusz BzeSowski. Since lo?? 
there anpeared in Cracow "Kwartalnik filozo"iczny" (Philosph. Quaterly) -nd since 
19^5 in Lvov "Studia Philosophica" whir.h carried articles in the Western lanpuapes. 

A special coraroission of the Polish Philosophical Society is now premrin^ the publi- 
cation of the worlöJ of Twardowaki , though his min importance lies less in his orLeinal coi>. 
S51-^"/W ^^.^^""^P^'^ ^^^'^ ^" "^^^ teacl-dnp activlties ,his endeavor to impL^nt in^^^n^'"^ 
the spirit of scientific philosophy and the intell€ctnal sti!ma--tion he provided. "e was 
t-e representative of psyc' ologism in philosophy and sone of his ideB.s resen^bled V^ose of 
.^emons-; he distingidshed between the obiec-T and ti^e conten?J|of ideas (^''orsteUunffe"). Two 
facts are of outstandin^r ingjortance ^or T'olish t)hilosoT>hy; 1.) Twardowsld. ' s instflllatdon 
in Lvov in 1.^95 anri the founding of the Lvov school o^ philoso^hyi oj t;.e tränier of 
Tl^rardows]d. ♦ s pupil viio v/as at first "docent" in Lvov to ¥«rsaw d-r5.^^ 
t'ie first World and the founding of the l*irsaw sc'ool of philosophy i.e. of the Polsh 
school of lof-ic in the reorranized and repolonized Warsaw 'Tniversity, *ukasievdcz v'^o v;as 

also for some tiine ndnister of educatlon in Poland-stayed wit^ gome interruptions at 
t^e university of Warsaw until the occupation of the city by the aermans duHn^ the second 
World >ar)the destruction of hisapartment ^nd of his library. 

Althou^h the sc^^ool of lo;?:istics founded by -fcukasieu/icz and 'lis coUeariie 
Str^nislÄw Lesniewsld and later by their common pizpil Alfred Tarski (now at the University 
of California) paralleled the activitiea of the Vienna Circle, neither Twardowski (in 

Lvov) nor ^ukasiewicz or Lesniewski vere n^opositivists.' In f.ct Twardowski and hi 

s n^TDils 

had rather idealistic 

t endendes 

and -öjk^sievicz had Cat'^oUc convictions. But 

^siewic. had only for tx^ditional .etaphysic, *nd t'^at he co.ld 
refom Philosoph,, b. .^n, of sy^^oUc lo.ic and t^ua ^ve it a ri.or.., scientific 
cha..cter He developed such a p^.:.. alread. in I027. It i, in the sen,e of 0^. 
gra. thal^arslci dealt vdth the px^b^e. of truth-cne of the tx^ditional p.oble:ns cf 
pnxlosophy - by means of his lo^istic tools. 

Wien Polish indeoendence was reestablished 

.«„ ,,, „„, „,,, ^,, _ ,,^^, ^^ ^^^_^^ ^^^ ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ 

c«*.r, of ^ondsuc *.^«. The C,th,Uc M,,..».. „f ,*u„ ,„u ^^. .^ 

nauled after the second world vjar. 

of th. „mv«,«. of ,1u««„ „«^., schol. ^«,lmu. . Prot»*.* t,„io,t.„. 
.na . „„^»x .,, ^ „r ..„ ^.„^,. ,_,,^ p,^^ ^„, ^, ,^^ ^^^ ^^^_^ ^^ ^^^ 

n» ^^. in th, „rld. I„ the „«.„tl.. ta.«c. ..^ h.v. heco»,, th. h„b of lo.lo.X 
.tuai« «, th, PoUeh lorici.. .„a .th,™t,ol„„ ,^„e., ..fe^„H d.oiS^'t;tr"*' 
th«,.. th. p„.l^.tlo trena of,«cl,t»,tl.u,n Jhioh .or.d 1, c>,™„ „ /,,A^" 
.nd f„„ to Prehc, .„d el«i,er, „...r p«,.tr.t«, Pot.M „a *=•„ r«l., t„,. 
until the present time^ 

One could « s.m up fcy «*„, sayin« that Polish phi].oso*y 
started as an offshoot of German philo5JODhy but inoved av^y in Western direction; until 

the first world var its main interest vms -as it is today ^or o^^e^ reasons 
in Soviet Hussia- lAile as a matter of doctrine it lacked primarv oriFinalitr, Thereafter 
it became creative in symbolic logic which role was realized mainly by the Warsaw 
school of philosophy, There was no connection whatever between this re8urp:ence of 
logic in Poland in the XXth Century and ^olish mediewl and Renaissance loeic ss de- 
scribed by Henryk Struve in his study "Histon^ of lof^ic as a theoiy of knowledre in 
Poland , (1) Jan iukasiewicz was as a logician a continuator of the work of modern 
loKicians and raathematicians such as Peirce, Jevons, Schroeder, Frege, Russell, l'^it e - 
head, Vailati.Couturat ,and o'hers. He worked out a whole series of axioijis.tic Systems 
of the propositional calculus the first of »*iic>- having been creatsd hy Frere. "e 
first sketched a System of tri-valued loFic (1990) followJl/afteJ^«rds '19?! ) 
but independently in this country by the n-valued loric of the American m^themtician 
E.L. Post of the Ci^ CoUege,New York. (?) 

According to the Nestor of Polish philosophers T^'deusz Kotarbinski 
Mip ^ukasiewicz sin^jlified the axiomatic syst«ns of Frepe,''hitehead,Russell, 
Hilbert,Nicod,etc. ,in^rented the Polish System of notation(letters without parentheses). 
Developin« his System of tri-valued logic as a/^ainst the Aristotelian- or as he pre- 
ferred to call it "Chrysippian" logic—fiukasiewicz trled to do what Lobachevsid. 
achieved in eeometry. At the end of his life snent in DubUn, Irela.^d , as a refugee 

from irazi-occupied and then from coramunist-domin»ted Poland,-£ükpsi«wicz wrote a 
reinterpretation of Aristotelian lopic (•?) 

Jan Eukasiewicz (187^-195<^) who began his career vdth > study "The principle 
of contradiction in Aristotle" vron over for his ideas bis yo^mg^r colleague ^'tsnisJuv 
Les'niewski (188A-1939) . '-mile both of them became the pioneers of mathematical logic 
in Poland, neither one was a mathematician by prof easioh ,although *ücasiewicz h«id 
knowledge of higher m;=.thenfttics. Les'niewski was self-taught in matheimtics insofar as 
this sub.iect was not taught in a German type "gymnasium". Only their pupil Alfred Tarski 
was not a philosopher but a mthematician in the first place. Lesidewski worked out a 
System of protothetics,of ontology,and of mereology, Tadeusz Kot»rbins;d, who took ovrr 

parts of Lesniewski's conceptions states that Lesniewski called 
part of logic whose vP.ri^bles are constituted - functors." «« 




According ^o this it is perr^ssiMe to Substitute for the variable the Operators 
desi^n-.ted by the si^ns of con.iunction, alternative, imolioation etc. TIe cP.lled 
ontoloRy a calc^xLus of mmes and mereolo^ the study of the relationship« of a 
framenb to the «hole (not of the part to the vhole). Accordin. to Kotar^in^ski thi^ 
was also dealt ^th later by "elson GoodK*n. Leiniewski' s ontolopy influence^ Pol^nd-s 
prominent lo^ician KaziBiier« Ajduki«dcz,fomerly professor at Lvov ,now at !-'arsaw 
University and chief editor of the lo^cal anmral "Studia lortca" published in 
Western langu.ges! Ajdukievdc. ^o shoved tMs influence in bis work "Die s.-ntakti- 
sehe Konn«citaet " (Studia philosophica',I«ow.l936) is a supnorter of conventionalism 
and amonp Polisb lo^cians perhaps dosest to the neo-positivists. A.idukievdcz wrote 
recently a handbook of lo^c(f or teachers) tmnslated into Gennan and published by 
the "Aufbau Verlag" in lifest Berlin. -It vras said about PoLLsh lo^icians that all of 
then,. were either direct pupils of *ukasievdcz or the pupils of bis pupils.Somethin. 
Sindaar was also said about all Polish philosophers with retard to Kardirderz Twardowski 

but perhaps vAth lesa justif ication. ^ ^ ^ hxt^i^U^ '^^'^ 

Les1^ewski-s speculations m v «^ iA< » h M^ed *«*i«» *y^lish mathemati- 
cians! A very interestin«- personality ainong Poüsh mthenatician« and philosophers 
vas Leon Chwistek (l88t-19U) whose bit>ther-in -law-the math ematician Wfod^^iTr-ier« 
Stozek vas killed by the Gennans in Lvov.Chi.'istek was active in Cracow .not in 
Warsavjhe wrote in 1935 "The fronbiers of science" and became also knx,wn as an 
aest; etician and painter. The Warsaw sC^ool itself was ori^nalLy constituted by 
i^akasievdcz,Lesniev«ki a«i their coimnon pupil Tarski who fled to the United States 
when the Gen«ns occupied Poland. Tarski is at present also member of tbe PoUsh 
Acaden>7 of Sciences in Warsaw. When the logician Tadeus« Kotarbi4ki, a leftist 
noTV-Mandst intellectual and jiiilosopher was named in 1957 its presidenb. Poland 
conferred the highest scientific honor on a philosopher anywhere in the world.He still 

h^ds this Position. F^tarbin'ski is sometünes «^^^^^^^^It^f ^''^ °^ '^'' "^'''^'' 
school of philosopl^ but he does not share this opinio^^s not a s^bolic 
logician in the usual sense of the word but he popiaarized lo^stics in bis writ«n« 
and lectures. As a philosopher he is a materiaiist and even a pirtisan of a lay 

relirf-on and of non-denominp.tional ,non^I%rxi8tic ethics (in America he mi^ht have supporf^ed 
Ebhical Culture) or an a^nostic ^in the Am-rican sense). Interested in the senantdcs 

of natural langua^ee and epistemolo^y he tried a reduction of lan^a^« to purely material 

relationships (such as physical obiects,the electro-mapnetic field^nd calle^ his the^ry 
'^reism" or also somatism and finally "concretism". Kotarbiiiski sbated in 195Ö that 
reism developed from the criticisma directed a^inst treatin^ propertiee as ob^jects 
of a certain kind* This led him to the assumption that only thin^s i,e, physical obiects 
which can be located in space and time exist in the basic sense of that word. Grammatical 
nouns vMch are not names of things are only appar»nt names from the concretist point 
of vievf. This systm is precisely the one based on that formulated by Stanislaw Lesniewald.. 
But it may be remiaded here that Frans Brentano also propted relsm''''only his thinss were 
not exclusively material but encompasse3)^ychic entities. Kotarbinski fbom in 188^) 
published in 1929 "The Sflements of the Theoiy of Knovledf^e,Lo«?ic and "ethodology". 
His enistsmolo^cal System includes a denial of the exj^stence of fictions i,e of 
psychical objects,events, states of affairs,relationships,properties etc, Lately he 
became interested in praxeolofity. 

As for the positivism of Kazimierz A,1dukiewicz (bom IÖ90) his radical 
conventionalism goes farther than that of Henrf. Poincar^ It proceeds from lingxiistic 
principles.If according to somebody does not recognize for instance the 
principle of contradiction , (iukasiewicz had doubts about this principle) then he does not 
understand the meanine of "no", This is evident from the rules of language v^ich are 
a priori propositions and it is lorf.cally impossible to re.i'ect thenu Tlie linFuistic 
apparatus is conventional and partly arbitrary. AJdukiewicB speaks of the "world per- 
spective" of a given lan/ruape depending on its conceptual anpam^ us. But this world 
persDective is a collection of propositions about the vrorld,not the world its elf. 
r^ we change the linguistic apparatus we shaLl Iwws ö4faWprobl^ms or ouestions and ^ ^/u^^ 

Solutions or answers but all this vdll not af f ect the world. Propositions are 
der>endent not only on experience but on language.Comrentionplism is neither reistic nor 
nomin-listic since reism and nominalism denend on the adopted langi;a.Pe. Ideallto, however, 
does not speak about the vrorld but about the Cognition of the world. 


The flowering of '-''olish philosophy vas cut short hy an unparalleled c-tastroDhe-the 

second world -war- which c^used the death in Poland of sone s:a ndllion victims mostly 


civilians,half of them ethnic Poles , half of thon Jews. The historian of philosophy 

^ftadystew Tatarkiewicz relatea: "a very ^reat part of the youn^er Generation perished 

in battle or were murdered in German camps; a very j5:reat number of scientific Workshops, 

rf ^ . • • 

institutes,libraries were devastated,plundered,rased to the ground..#Thus the year 
19^t5 started a new epoch," It may be added that all higher education v;as abolished 
in Poland, all universities closed, 2Ö university ^^of essors in Lvov were killed, 
lÖO Professors of the university of Cracow sent to conc entration camps. /jnon? those 

killed were the philosophers Joachim Metallmann, a philosopher of science, and 
Leopold Blaustein, a phenomenologist and aesthetician, The surviving Polish scholars 
were even forbiüden the use of the existin^ librarier., 

Despite all this , Polish philosophy picked up after the ^/;ar x^-^ere it left off 
before it although the losses were deenly feit: The «»»teat /TJ)I:ish logician ^feukasiewicz 
warf/^road and so ><fte his most important pupil Tarski. Kot arbinski and Ajd^okiewicz be- 
came the leaders of logic in Poland; the latter published after the war a book 

"PhilosophiCf,l problems and movements" dritical of idealisnu 

Andres ej Mostovrski- 

pei^iaps more a mathematician than a philosopher- kJEcame-aoart fiom AJdukiewicz-to 


the fore as raost important mathematical lo^cian. Although '^oland had a communist 
gov?rnmenb, Polish philosophy proceeded from 1945 tili 1951 more or less on the old 
lines, There was an addition of rarxist writers. Put the pupil of Husserl .-^he 
known Polish phenomenolop:ist Roman Ingarden could still publish in the 19/to»s 
bis main work on meta^:hjrsics "The Argument about the Exist^nce of the !'^orld" in 
^\io volumes* In the meantime it became out of orint and the ^rst isalutiÄ^ s new 
edition appeared in 19<^0 /as part of the "Philosopl^.ical '"orks" of oman Inff^rde^ 
published bir the "State Scientific Publications" in Warsaw)* Innrarden stated at 
that time (19^6) in the preface that "when I came to the conv?,ction in 191Ö that I 
cannot accept the idealistic position of Plusserl conceminf' the question of the 
ex: stence of the real world, I wrote i^wn -in the summer 191Ö- 

a lon^ letter sevei^l tens of pages ström «here I «cplained the reasons for ^Ich 
I could not agree at that time with the position of 'transcendental- ideaUsm v^icb 
appearj;/iiToL of Husserl-s asseHion. in his "Ideeo .u einer allgemeinen ^ae...«.o. 
logie." ( 5/ 

The Polish government became irked by theß*^ of /^ !%T^^^fT*d^hip in 
,nd ^roceededT^r'iedy th^ Situation by forcible means. The philosophers deemed 
averse to %ncisra were removed from their chairs and prevented from public»tion 
but IS^conbinued to draw 1*«ir salaries .Some were p i ni»^ *? t««^^ 1°^^« ^^^^°^ 

was CO 

nsidered a neutral science^not t.inted by hostile ^^'^''%J^!'^}' ^"^^^ 

of Sciences in Cracow (PAU) founded still drin^ the Austriftn i*p*b# r ^^SärKf t wit^erinR 


and a new Polish Acadany of Sciences (PAN) ^«s created in l-'arsaw in the a«w/ouil« 
"ftilace of Culture" -a pift of the Soviet Union. This Institution took over roughly 
40 'f. of the personnel of the old Acadeny.J^members were ar,ooinbed by the Government. 

Important philosophers were hit by these measures,for instance the 
histonLan laadysiaw Tatariciewicz and Roman Inearden. The logicians were not molested 
and their output was left undisturbed. A new philosophical organ "Mysl ?" 

(Philosophical Thought) began to-appear under the editorship of the leading PolL^h 

Adam Schaff', , ,^ j _ . ^^^ 

Maioist philosopher-A younger 5»n unknown before the second world war- and was s 'pT»sed 

to promote ai»i disseminate Ifewcist doctrine. It aweared fron 1<?51 tili 1057. One of 

the members of the editorial staff was Leszek Xolakovski, n talented younjr philosopher 



flamboyant Marxist revisionist.In the 

who became known in later years as 

meantime he D^*«iB*^-a^ denounced even his own coUection of essays wibM.shed in Test 

Germany in 19^0 as not corresponding to his preswit viewa. Adam Schaff himself , 
a native of Lvov and admnistratively speaking the most influential figure in Polish 
philosophy -he is not only professor at Warsaw University but di-ector of the Insti- 
tute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences- is a middle of 

original ^ j. ^ , o. t* 

the road -ÄWist. but *^i, his/dialectical materiaUst . ardor steadied later on. It 

should be stated in aU. /aimees that even y«B( ret>ression in -oland never 
went in Poland s*i*K<^~i^other communist countriee. CathoUc philosophers and or^ans 

were not touched, obviously for opTX.rtunistic reasons due to the power of the church 

and also^ they were 


considered less dangerous than liberal bourgeois philosophers <h^ I 
more infliience «a/the youth» r i 
j^U'X;^ This period ^lö^^^/In 1956 ^en Varadysiaw Goimiika came to power. 7% '^fl/tJC^"^^ 

X^vsl Filozoficzna" ceased pub3J.cation and another joumal "Studia Filo^.oficzne" aopeared 
under the formaj editorship of the menbioned Leszek Koiakowski^e/editors if ej^e C g ot 
chang^*^dam Schaff is also on the board of "Studia Filozoficzne- «üüWBS^ as the oolicies 
of the .iournal which is not a/ISrSst organ any more but prints any inaterial of philo- 
sophical sif'nificance .This lack of doctrinal conformity makes it frscinating readin^ 
as a^ainsr (ffie^urely T'krxist "Voprosy Filosofü" in Russia or the "Deutsche Zeitschrift 
fuer Philosophie" of East Berlin. The auarterly "Ruch Filo^.oficzny»^ >;hich appears irreg- 
ularli^resiamed its publication in Torun.Its current hibliography Covers philosophical 

publications in the vihole world.It also carries short articles and self-announcements 
of authors^of books and lectures. ^ Jy(i /) '^ T — ^ - ^^ ^ ^ 

^ /Adam Schaff is a fertile writer and taken seriously as a thinker even 

by non-Ilarxists.He wrote a nuraber of books. 'for instance "The concept and the word". 
"About questions of 14arxist theory of tnith", "The Ob.iective character of Historical 
Laws" .He is a critic of the socalled socioloffy of knowledge of Karl l^nnheim ,of the 
idiographic theory of humanistic sciences of Plckert and Windelbmd but oT5T)osed vi^orous- 
ly the "abolislunent" of the principle of contradiction by some I^krxD-Sts v;ho overexten- 
ded themselves. Some time a^o he was gu-st professor at the '^niversit-»" of ^elgrade in 
Yugoslav'a. Helena SLlsteln is a more radcal Harxist than Adam Schaff. 

Under the more liberal regime of Gomu23ca both Ingarden and Tatar- 
kiewicz resiimed their teaching posit:'ons and their publdcationa, These publications 
are not only undertalven at the expense of the state but royalties are ^dd for them 
in conformance vdth the length of the book in ouestion. rae main v/orks of P^oraan Ingarden 
deal with philosophy of «Ä Uterature and also of art .His basic study wiiich made him 
known in Gerr^ny was his book "Das literarische Kunstwerk" printed in Falle and reprinted 
in an enlarged edition in 1^60 in Tuebingen by Iliemeyer. This book is in fact an ontology 


of the literary work of art conpled with a theory of, Its m-^.in theory is one of 
the internal sti^tificatio of the Ut.rary >:ork of art whiQ^ cont.ins fonr strata : 



. J*. 

Sounds, meanings 'of sentences) schenatl^»^ o-^-^+ 

esy ,8cnenatized aspects and re-i-esented obiectsi the 

phenoimnologist andn«tapii-~„'ol«n he h.s « ,nnt._ ■*■ . ' /,\ 

*' * '»lit?iT pontion In PoUsh ->'-ilo»on! ... / 6 ) 

-e «mlT^ed the "„ethetlc .Ultud." In hl, "Studi. . lüt.l^H» -. , >' , 

Stud.») „hlch de.! „t „nly ^th ut.„t„„ b.t .!,„ .ith the „ther .rte 1„ fc-^i.'* 
^^n. I ,.M,„ ,*„ „i„t,i„, «,, t::«..,, ^ <„,,eu«ty oT .„thetlc handle, the 
probl« „ »«,,, „, ,^,,,,,^ ^„^^^^, ^ ^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^^ ^^ ..eo„o.etl»tle„"- 
In di.fere„„. h.t,e.„ the „* ef art .^ Ue eone.etl.etion 1„ the -„d „f the 
CO««,., in^enden u e.i, ,, „, thet^^e^'in ^^„, „ a,^e=lati„„^^.elMe 
to e^neo.» oonc.etl,a«.e„ e....e .„. „. a«. x«.^„ ,„^, ,„ _ ,^, ^._ ^^^^_ 
at,.e et the .„Ive.elt. or Lv„,. *J^ ,, ,^.,ed 1„ . eert ,r ,^, ^,, :,„„,., „iltlt^'«^ 
*.o« he „r h.v'n, app„p«at^ hi. theo^ of et«tino.tio„ of th. arte ,« of '' ■ 

hav.„. Meap^Hed it. .„,.^e„ *o ie a ^.ete. of fl„,„o«o.. has di.oove.ed .dne 
different uses of form and contepb in aestr^etic theory. 

He find at .he op.osite pole in aesthetics the St.nisiav Osso>..i' 
a natu^Hst and e^pi^cist in aest.etios Jo ^ts the ..Hdit. of o.. aest.etic ^ 
cepts to our (i,e. ^.opean) clture and -ä^^/h.t .aintai^n. ob,«tivit. of 
aesthetic values is .erel^r a social sj^to. not a scientific position. His nv=in ^r^. 

"At the bases of Aesthetics" ( u oodstaw n«+«h-nn ^ ..u- t 

^ poastaw estetyki; whach was reprinted and enlarged 

in 195Ö 

ori,inally|I^eared in the 193Qie8. Accordin. to him tj^^es of aesthetic 

e:cperiences and evaluations lead to pluralistic answers. .I^ere is no sin^e so^:rce of 
aesthetic «cpexlence nor an. Single aeshetic chax^cteristic. He disn.„ishes hetween 

autotelic (self-contained, and hetex^telic art .hich is and v.s at .he servlc. 
Of reU.ion,of the state,of social institutions etc. ;a:hou.h the .reat art o^ the nast 
alv..ys was hetex^t^ic^it v.s alA acco^ni«! h. s^n art >^ich .as aut.t.Hc' ^his 
was for instance the case in ^,^t ^.ere fsn«ll ) realistic aH Hved side b. si.e 

wLth (great) fom«li.,ed reli.-ous art. The tradition of heterot.l^c a^ , 
Opposition of the miblic to modern art o^^xic art exr^l^ins the 


as contradictin?: the sacred ima^e of the art in the past. Aesthetic values are not 
made by philosophers at their df^sks but developed by cultures during centuries . 
ssowskiViBBftfan 'excellent analysis of realistic art and he also deals with 

semantic and aseraantic art ttae music being an example of aseinantic c^nfigurations. 

Historical studies were alvajrs Poland^s forte and it is in '\aÄdysiaw 
Tatarkiewicz ^^^•(occupies the chair of aesthetics at the university of Warsaw 
in vjhom the love of historical studiea,of Greek and Roman antinuity and of medieval 
La.tinity becane crysta"ili7.ed in purity. Tatarkiewicz wrote a history of philosophy 
in three voli:imes;the t'iira\encompassing modern philosophy is the largest of the three 
so that ancient ani medieval philosophy serve as a sorb of introduction to modern 

philosophy* The vhole is "äj t exftbook written vith ^reat clarity ,It is esoecially 
valuable for somebody interested in the evolution of European t^ought in the "'ast 
hxindred years» In addition Tatarkievdcz is today after the death of Bd^ar de Bramme 
(University of Ghenb) certainly the outstanding historian of ancient and medieval 
aesthetics. His History of aesthetics encompassing "Aesthetics in Antiquity" 
and "Medieval Aesthetics " in two voltmies appeared in i960 and is a .loy to read a<i?'i^j'^ 
te its lucidity?, It is accoi^anied by vol-uratoous excerpts of the original Gredc 
and Latin texts vath their Polish translations and has as such no parallel in 

evdc z * s 

historical literature of this kind.The original texts of the Hellenistic times 
are disnersed and not easy to get at« As for the medieval aesthetics Tatarki 
work i'^^ based ^tmimmml^on the pioneering vTork of Mgar de Bniyne ( ^ ) "who accord- 
ing to Tatarkiewicz hir(NsaLy has single-Iianded constructed the inposing ed.ifice of 
a comp:"ehensive history of medieval aesthetics« De Br^nme^s study bepins with Boefchius 

and includes the XIII ce tury. 

Father Jan Popiel characterized VJi; Tatarkiewicz at a meeting of the 


Polish Philosophical Societ^^y 30,195^ 

in the follovdng way : 

,. Tatarkiewicz was averse to extremi st Solutions as a cautious scholar. ,and 
avoided' vievTS contrasting common sense, The schools Wiere 
studied, influenced him less than Brentano, Aristotle and among his contemp- 
orar&es perhaps Windelband and Rickert. arurlish philosophy is also close 
to him »Tatarkiewicz dealt with many subiects not onl3r with history of 

philosophy but also with ethics and aesthetical theory. According to 
him natural Cognition has many asDects and its universe 


is the vjorld of things and not of ideas, These th-ngs 
have an infinite variety of properties and relations. 
Settinfr up a definition means makinfr a choice of a deteimned 
perspective. In typölopical sci'=?nce5 definitions may lack 
rifror and precision, To Tatarkiewicz the history of philo- 
sophy is a history of the architecture of human thoupht» 
He rejects all fanaticism and is equally dlsinclined tp 

philosophical maximalism as to minima lism. Heisa , i-j yn 

philosopher of realistic optiraism* " »Xii^ filoZofi^ly^^yttd XiflU Voi-o^bi^L 

Thus Jan Popiel^ - After the war Tatarkiewicz published apart from his historical 
works a study "On Hap^iness". Tatarkiewicz mmmämkaa the ob.iectivity of ethical valnes, 

The pupil of Tatarkiewicz in aestletics is the able young "docent" at the Hniversity 

> • 

of Warsaw Stefan Mor^^wski , a moderate socialist realist.The moderatjon consists in 
the fact that Ibravski considers xn realism not a st3rie but an attitude of mind or 


a World vievr such as for instance the Baroque or the Renaissance world view,S# Mörawski 
lived for some time in Eh^l^nd and is especially well versed in English aesthetics of 
the XVIIth centuiyjnotably on Burke, Socialist realism plays no particTilar role in 
Polish aesthetics nor is it required in the practice of arb as in Russia. ( ^y 

Marxism is not so rauch a probleci for the older philosophers in Polanr? 
as for the youth because the 3nouth wants academic standing and the State favorv«i 
Marxism,This is a fact of paramount importance, It would be erroneous to assume that 
tl-ie bourgeois Polish philosophers criticize overtly llarxism^They do not, AH they do 
want is to be löt alone and to continue thdLr work of teaching and publication, The 
criti^isms ddrected by Kb3ifekowski afrainst • arxist orthodoxy were an intramural communist 
phenomenon not a criticisri coming from outside. T' «> -Dhilosophically impor^ant >>T)rk of 
Leszek Ko^kowttL appeared. in ^-^arsaw in 195Ö.It is entitle^ "The indiuidual and tbe 
infinite. Freedom and the antinomies of freedom in the piilo?=?ophy of Spinoza." 
The book, a volume of 6*^0 pages, is no monograph ahout Spinoza^ s philosopliy .Its author 
wanbs "to Interpret t . e classical problems of philosophy as probl ms of moral« and'tö ^ickn'^ii 

into ouestions 

the r'uestions of metaphjrsics , anthropolo^ and epistemology 

posed in the it U um f or human moral probl erasj their secret hijimanistic content« should 

be uncovered. The question o:^ Deity should be presented as «M^»*^t# » ^ the problesn of man, 

the problem of heaven and earth as that of human freedom, the problem of nature as that 

of the relationship of man to the world .the nroblem of soul as that of the value of 


of life,as Problem of the relationship betveen human bein^s," j ne b-sic idea seema 
to be here the search for the modeis of mf^taT^iysics in et-ic«, Rickert also mintained 
that the root of mötaphjrsical Systems is crrounded in ethical cl^^ims to the vorld, ^ 
Kci:äko>.«ki»s translation of the "tränst er r es trial" int- the terrestial also reminds 
of Ludwig Feiierbach, Kolrakoi^ki is stronsly anti-clerical (in the European sense of 
this wDrd)and considers metaphysical problenis as covert problenis of thfiolofiTT.He vould 
obviously like to cleanse those problems from their theolop^ical varnish. He thii4<^^ in 

st vitanlnEellectiaal moverAts «ptfiflBpMMVi* are llarxLsm^ phenomenology 

and the psjrch&naly^is of Freud, 

A Marxist in ethics is Professor I^Ärek Fritzhand ,the director of the 
Institute of Ethics at the university of Warsaw and at the same time the chairman 
öf the department of philosophy at the university of Wrociaw .^^rxist ethics h-^ve both 
a descilptive and normative character, The traditional non-7!«rxist point of view 
in ethics is expressed by Czeei&w Ä Znarrderovski.professor at the university of Pozn-^n 

who syii5)athizea vdth traditional Christian ethics. He published in 1957 three booka 

"Valuations and Iferms" JOceny i Nönny) % "(TuLlt and Reaponsibility" (ya.ra i odpovdedKiAlnosc^ 

and "Principles and sohools of ethics" ( 7asady i klerunki et^ki). 

The sociolosy of ethics is done by Jfeiia essor of the university 
of Warsaw and wif e of the mentioned StanisJjav Ossowski. She is an ethical rel^tivist 
and deals minly with histoiy of ethics. Acoordin. to her,ethics is not a nonnative 
seie/ne« if pwcticed scientifically but a social science. In a book "BÖHr^eois 
Moielity" piAlished a fevr years a^Ossowska describea Ben.landn Franklin as the 
perf ect imdel of this kLnd of morals i*hile the Frenchma" Volney -nd the Italian 

/ Li I f 

of the Renaissance Alberti ipi^irrasT-^Ts pure types of such morals.At a meetin« of 

the Warsaw branch of the ^olish Philosophic^l Society on April 27,1^59 Professor 

Ossowska dealt with "The main typea of ethical Systems ( -^ ) and st»te^: 

"There »re tw> types of s^'sterls <f this WLnd: the one,deductive, wo-_ 
eeeds -more reometilco- ,the other n^re timely. starts ^«"^ Pf^'^'^^J^f^'^L,« 
Observation and then proceeds to deductiom As an axample of the ^i«* J^« 
we may mention those Systems that hav* as suprene directive the multiplication 
of pleasures and ndnindzation of pain. They introduce,however,alwaya 
some additional preraises \^ich break up the allep;ed solidity of the pyramtd 
of the syst an. This is done lÄien some special pilnciples or 



distribution are added or vAien a principle of some "true" haoniness 
is introduced T*!iich is of course one answerinp t.he wedilections 
of the author .Amoncr these t:\n5e8 the System of Bentham is t'ie Iwst 
susceptible of such ob.iections but tintenai-.le nßvertheless. 

"Höre tjmely "xe the Systems that vrould deterndne t;ie needs 
eomAon to all «an and demnd their fulfillm-nt. This type 
of thought was common in the XVIIIth Century and is taken up 
today once nore by American writers callin^ ^^^^f^^f _,,.„, 
opeiltionists. These s^^tans are allegedly complet^y empxrLcal 
but they too require non>«apirical dxrectlves for «c^ple 
the postulate that elementary needs must be fulfilled so that we 
must set up a hierarchy of needs; we then need postulates of 
distribution ,thus for instance the elimination of such means 
that lead to the fulfillmenb of the needs but are neverthd.ess 
ethically inadmissible. A pluralistic structure of ethicAl 
svsteras (if we shou].d call than that ) would be reouired. 

l^aria Ossov;ska ,a typically n-turalistic philosopher^has been inf luenced by J!ax' Weber. 
S?e is one of the r^erous women that work in Pol^nd in the field of phxlosophy, ^ 

relatively more women than in any other countiy. Among the^. is IzT-dora Tfembska iita . 

an able historian who tmches at the university of Cracow } then Daniela Gromska 

who made a trenslation of "%comachaean Bbhics"} Irena Kronska ,the editor of the 

Libraiy of Classics of Phllosophy ,a very meritori.ous enter^rise initi ted. b y the 

State during the period of Ifeiodst "intepration." The principle of selection of th^e 
f or translation and publication .„+„f^»„ if^^^^S"^ 

classics/is «M historical import-nce,not any partisan point of vxew. Je Js«»^here 

also Iferia Kokoszyi^ka, a loRician , Janina Sztejnbar^ -Kotarbii4ka^ wif e of Tadeusz 

Kotarbii4ki «BtaM who wrote on tU theoi^' of si^ns, the 15a«ist Helena ailstein 

already mentioned and many others» 

A few Points would be instrumental for the understandinp; of PoUsh 
philosophy in the 65 years i.e. when it achieved maturity: 1.) there was no 
connection with Russian philosophy until 1945 although some individual soholars taurfit 
in Russia faute de mieuxj 2.) there w..s initiariy a close connction with Geman 
philosophy especiany with its Austrian vs^rLety; but the latter' s representative 
Frenz Brentano altho^himself a German , did not belonp to the nftinstream of Geinan 
philosophy but to an anti-Kantian op^sition to it .As a tneist nd a realist he saw 
in ICant the fulcrum of philosophical decadence P.nd in German "idealism" .n aberra- 
tion.Thus what the father of modern philosophy in Poland Kazimierz Twardovfflkl 
espoused was the Opposition wing of German philosophy. ^ is still more tnie 

**i»'rS^&'in Poland .Jid of^\Sgical positivism of the Vienna 

of the lopii 

Poliah pfailcsophy todas 

Pöllsh phillosophy achieved a renotwx far beyond the frontiert of 
Poland durlng the period betw««n the two world wars dae to the 
LvOT-Waraaw school cf^llosophy rhich exoelled im?iialy in the field 
of modern ayabolio logio and phil03ophy of aoience^The original 
founder of thia eohool was not a logioian bnt tho Vionna -born 
papll of Prana Brentaao KazimleM ü^mrdowakl . who took over the 
ohalr of philosophy at tho Dalrersitj? of Lvot (Anstrian Poland) 
In 1895. Hi8 pnpil Jan^^ukaaiowiOÄ f«±n a native of Ltot) beoam« 
the father of Polish Icgio and tranaferred his actiTities to Wareaw 
dnrtng the firat world ma when the ünlversity of Waraaw weö repoloni^ed. 
Hlä oolleggtie waa another logioian Stanis&w Lecniewski and their 
papll wmM Alfred Tarski whc emÄgrated to the USA when the öemum« 
ocoupied Poland In the aeoond world war .He ieaohe« now et the 
miirersity of Oalifornla fBerkel^)^ Among the logioiana of thia 
school laa 5!&deuQS Zotarbinaki (now preaident of the Poliah Aoaden?? 
of Soienoas) nrit« laÄimiera Ajdukiewioa (also of Lvov) ,now editor 
of ••atudia logioa" in VJaraaw aiid chairiDan of the ly^partment of Logio 
of the Inatitute of Philosoph? and 3ociology at the loliah Aoademj 
of aoiences in Waraaw. He recently retired from his teaching position 
of Waraaw UtiiTeraits* ?his sohool of philosophj was olosely related 
to the philcöophs of the "Tionna Circle" and ita aupportera (Pndolf 
Carnap (nov? in USA ) 

Ludwig Wittgenstein and Bertrand Bus seil. 
lot all these logioi&ns were ueopoatiTrlBta or logical positivists^ 
som« •»p«olally Jan-^d^Lkaalcwlo« was a daYoutt Cathollo ,yet on the 
«hole Wie aohool nsa aeopo^itlvlat^tadouaz Caesowaki (üaiverailr^ 
of Toriin,reoentls retir«d,t.l80 belongei to the doralnant :>oliah 
•hoool of phlloaophy. He still «dita "Bucla lllozofioanj" , e. jouxaal 
founded t)5 E.Twardowaki bofore the ^rar. 

In additlon Poland had snd still haa In ^he peraon of Boraen 

th9 phenomenologloal eohool of Bdimmd Httsserl who waa a rather Isolatad 
flgnra Itj Poll8h phlloeophy and worked In thf5 theory of aaathetioi; 
another notabl« tlgnre was WladT;8laii Tatarklewioz, a hlatorian of 
philoboplij and eapöoially of aeathetlo^ who taught until 1961 
at t2ha Universits of Warsaw and then rstired* But he is Btill 
ohlef editor of the aesthetio yearbook "Bstetyka" v?hioh appears in 
Warsaw stince 1960. 

While the Oorrcans destroyed all oentera of higher laarning in 
Poland during th^lr oooupation, Poliah philosophj took up in 1945 
whera It laf* off befora the war^Ita contlnuity did not snffer 
dasplta griavouB personal and material loeaaa.Lnkasiawioh for in- 
stanoe amigrated during the Haai period ^and after a aojourn in 
öermany and 'tiwitserland aettled aa a profeaaor of Dsthaioatloal 
logio in Mhlin (Irland)« He died thara at tha age of 78 in 1956« 
The uriTersitle« of Ivov and Vilno wäre lost to Ruasia and wäre 
rapleoed by the ünlrersity of WrooJrÄw ^Totmi and •Sodz^She Oatholio 
university of Lublin ao^utred a new oompanion in a atata nniversity» 
Poland had also a nnmbar of Oatholio Thomiat philo&ophera aotiva 
aapeoially at the Clepiurtmanta of thaolcgy in ^ifaraaw ^Craoow and 
natorally in Lublin« 

Phan the CommunJbt government took over in Poland it was faoed 
by a yery tough problem« It lacked intellüctual oadraa and had 
no thaoretician of nota« The Polish anveraltiea wore dominated by 
the neopODitirista of the Lvov-Waraaw aohool of phll:sophy .Tha 
government had to put up v;ith their aerrioea beo'^se no other 
teaohera of philoaophy wäre availabla and the rankt of the intelleot« 
uala wäre thinned out by tha war and llassi p raeoution« - gay e r th a l a aa 
|;he neopoaitiviata were intelleotoally speaklng^tho oiain opponenta 
of dialeotioal loaterialiam «The Cathollo philoeophcra reoeived 
leaa attention beoauaa their influenoa on oollege youth waa muoh 

amaller. Therefore th« naopoaltlvlsta iwiDtMßuateirtei^ir^^ So.V* 
aooordlng to an axpreaslon of Adam 3ohaff«Adam dohaff was a 7oung nan 
oompletely unlcnown before the /rar and who -a natlva of Lvov born into 
imalthy botufgeolsle- beoame the leadlng figuro In Jterxlst phlloöophy 
In Poland^ 

50 oountoraot the th6 grlp of the neopo^ltlTista on 
univereity llfe, a ohalr of "oonlj empor ary aoolal äoctrino«** was oreated 
at th« unlrerslty of rSoda and In 1948 a ohalr of philoaophy oooupled 
by a Marxist was fotanded at th« U Iverslty of ^araaw. He had tliree 
aaeiatenta and thi^ «ma tbe total Iilarxlet teaohlng poreomiel In 
Varsaw in 195X# There also exiated a Central Party Sobool of the 
Aoademiy of polltioal solonoea wlth a few more aasiatanta but tha 
•aaü leadar'jhip as the unlverslty ohalr «Aa agalnat thia there wera 
£0*^0 non-4Iarxi8t füll profeaaora of philoaophy ^aociology and 
payoholcgy at the Pollsh tnirar eitle« who wlth their aaslatante 

enoompaaeed 100 aolontifio woi'lcera^Ho remedy this Situation a nut- 
work of party »ohools was üJHusrteft direotod by the "Inatitite of 
Social äoienoesClnatytut HaiHc äpoleo^nyoh) (IBS) at the Central 
CoosBiittee of the Polleh ütiited v^orkera^ Party «It fiinotioned In the 
yeara 19Sl-«i53)» 31noe 1960 the worJc of thia iuatltute was deoentraiiaed 
in tho oo'intry» 

Bxit all thia aeomed Inaaffiolent • To break the mcnopoly of 

non-2Iarxi»t philosophy at the ttilveraitlea the govörnment tcok streng 

adminlstratire meaanrea^in 1951» It aent all non-^^orxiat philoaophera 

into foroed retireinant -*exoept the logioiana who.were allowed to 

oontinae the teaohlng of logio as a neutral non^eological disoipllne» 

ThtL^ such Icglolana as !I?adeu82 KotarbindkipEazlnlers Ajdikiewioe er 

<^adeuG2 Csescwski oontinued to teaoh logio bat the oouraes of Komen 

Infarden and ?/ladyalaw Tatarkiewioa were prohibited* She non-l^larxist 

philoaophcrs \vore allowed to write but prohibited from publi&hing their 

4 ?Q£^ £^ ttxdi^c^ Oa^S^ 
The exlstlng phllosophloal publica t ion (^l^alao "Weh fllozofiojny'* 

otaaed to appear and a n6w<rpEilo3 0phioal «*«r^^^ Journal 

wiitygi PilogQfiQgna" was foundad under the editorship of Adam Sohaff« 
Theae oondltiont pravsUod untll 1956 i.e. untll the return of 
Wladyalaw Gomulka to power ^ In the meantlma 20 roltiraee of the works of 
•i-enln snd la yolumea of the worka of Stalin vi^xB publi^hod In Pollsh, 
Inveatlgations were oonduoted oonoernlng a hlatory of Pollah^progreaalve" 
philoiiophioal thought going back to the l5Jth oenturyil) 

The obief atrateglst in the work of Marxieation of lolish phllo- 
sophloal thought waa Adam Schaff Y/ho becaxne direotor of the Institute 

of Philosäophjf and Sooiolog; at the Poliah Aoadem^ *t Soleneea tewl; 

fourided in WaraaWtlhe old/Aoademy of Solenoe» in Or«oow was left i?7ither^^ 

ing on the vine and aome 80 jS of Ita merabera were taken OTisr by the 

»•w Aoademy in Warsaw.They were appolnted by the Goyernment« 

Adam Schaff was often described /the "dlotator" of philosophy in Poland 

Although he may deoide about the app^intments of nnireraity teaohera 

in thls field and about the publioationt^about what Is and what ia 

noirpubllshed- his rule may be desorlbed aa enlightened absolutism 

due to hie outstanding intelligenoe» He may be a proven üarxiat but 

ht hes no deaire to lower the level of Poliah phllosophy »But he followa 

baaioally the Idkki/aet By the Central Oommittee of the Fnited Pollsh 

Wprksra^ Party ♦ He may of oonrse influence^TBbse direotlves in his 

partloular ephere of inflaenoe« 

The attempt at foroible Uarxisation of Poliah philcaophy 

waa glven up after 1956 ,but not the work of Marxl&ation as such« 

The latter prooeeded «But the llberalization had great conse:^aenoea 

capeoially for the cid generation of philosophera »They were roinatated 

in their u^ilversity positiona and permitted to teaoh and their werkt 

wäre now prlnted# The Marxist philo ;iophloal Journal ••Mysl flloacfioana*' 

waa glven up and a new organ "Studla flloaofioane" waa founded lu- 

öteait Its «dltor In ohlef beoame the youtxg »'dooenV^ at the UniTersity 

of Waraaw leszok IColnkowski of '•revleionist" fame^perhapB the ablast 

phllcsopher of the young Marxist generation, But Adam Schaff remalned 

Ths / 

on thö öditorial board.ik« dlfferenoe between '•Myal filozoflczna'^ and 

tho ''Sttidia filozoficzne-' did not lay In the personal conipoalticn 
of the board of edltora-Kolakowski was also ono of the edltors of 
•'Mysl PiloBOficzna^' but in the program of the two Journals» Whlle 
''Mysl filozoficzna '' atated in ita program that its aim was to 
'♦permeate Polish acienoe with the Uarx-Lenin world yiew»* , ''aiudia filo- 
zofiozne " deolareö in its first isaae in 1957 prograTmatically that 
''it wants to ppan its columna to varioua vital ourrents and philosophio- 
al styles of the preaent time within the limita cf rigor oaa scientific 
oorrootneaa*" In other v/ords it reetored freedom of theoretioal disouasina 
Shiii faot that "Studia filozoflcane" preaent a mixture of Llarxist and 
non-i!arxiat materiala form its ohlef attraotion .The Journal Is in this 
roapeot unliue in the whole world» It oarried out this program. 
On the otlxer hand the non-Marxist organ "Buoh filc2Cfic»iay" resumed 
publioation In Torun under the editorahip of CzezowslLi. The usefalneas 
of this publioation l3 evident frora the faot thät it oarries a biblio- 
graphy of all Important philosophioal publioations -bocke and Journals 
In Bast and ''^eat-the streas J^/Qn the western publioations ;the 
Russian ones are Ilated in liaesian (Tu Latin tj?JioJ. Thiii Journal con« 
tinues /Ita traditlon/il o^^itae.It höS no iiarxij^t tinge. 

The Catholio ^'niveräity of Lublin oontinues of oourae the 
publioation of its q^uaterly »^RooÄnliLi Humanis tycsne*^ (liumani^tio 
Annuals). Sume of thess are devot$d to the hi^tory of the Churoh in 
Poland but on the whole it ia a magaaine of literary oritioiam dealing 
nith Polish poa!;s (Uiokiewioz^ 3107vaoki ,lforwid,eto. ) whioh haa no 
special Oathoiio ^teP^^^bort of litorary oritioiam and 
philologloal investlgations whioh differ little from ^imilar Journals 

Sci^frUf fyo. 

l|rxl.m 1. oompXetely ignored In thla 3carnal>;^;K,adine It uobodö^ «onld 
«ÄiteB tfaat: It apreara In a oonuamilät ooontry« 

Thfe pabliofttlon or tu« wriUnge of tha «a ?oiiaü philo- 
»opUor» of tha pra-war period waa r«aum«d. on the ^7hole tliaec wäre 
now aometiiaaa «ularged edltloaa or emendations of old worjos but 
aomo war« never publlshad beforo. 2he PoU.h govarnnent pays a nat 
fae for Äuoh pnblloaticaa aooorllng to tho length of the ,.ork (v.hloh maa 
enooiu-as» loquaoit,). That tho works of 6he loglolans auoh aa Tadousa 
Eotorblnakl and Kaalmierz AJduklewloz v^sre nm. prlnted In cot^prehasire 
•diUona gOA« wlthout 9a:7lng. Tadansz Totarbln^l -a Iflad« pf 
P?9-v,ar poaitlvlBm and •'r0iann'' ^a «ven appolnUd prealdent of th« 
Poliah Acaden© of Soiencoa in «arsaw . a honoriflo ponition wbioh 
h« still hclda now. l'his ia a uulqaa OBse in the wholo world »aaieiy that 
a phiiosopher haa bean eppointed to anoh a poat. But tho state offioe 
Of ßoientifio publioationa in «araaw alao printed (and still printa) 
the worka of th« philcsopher« "proao.ibed in the provicua perioö of 
Marxist repreaeion nanoly thc^e of i:oman Ingexdea and ^sayattw 
Tatorkiev^ioB. Homan Ineard»n had firet pobliehed bis "Stadic x «atatyki« 
(atudiea in Aeathetio«;^ln tv/o volmea .T'iis work -ddalln« eapaoiall^ 
with tansio and th« plaetio arte U a oontinuatton of hia «ork daaling 
with ttxe phenomenoiogy of Xiteratur. whioh waa oxlglnally publi^hed 
in 1930 in Qarmany and entitlei "Dae llteTarisohs Kaaatwark" .SWa 
work waa now tranalat.d into Poliah and publlsh3d for the firat tlm« 
in thia languaga :0_daj£l£jULternoxlm, (TTarsaw 1980) ?urthormore tho 
mnin ontologloRl work of Ingnrden "Spor o latniene awlata-f Che Cont^-o- 
rerey about tho «i»*^ of th« world^^waa prlnteö In two volumea 
(1960.1961) . Ingnrdii^Mpablished hl« ijork "Daa llterarioohe Kunat -erkf 
In Tübingen, Gsrirany ,1960 wid a oollootion of hia inveatieitiona t 

on ir,nsio,tho P^aatio arts and on tho für oontainod in "Stadia a aata- 
^ki" 196E ^pn Tübingen oridar tht heading "tjatsranohangon sui 

Ingardtin who Is Pol^d»8 ohlef theoretlolan in aeathetlos Is of 
oottrae widolj' knovm In Europa and ha« two year» ago a "yaataohrift" 
publiohvJd in hia hinor by pbenomanologioal phllosophnra. 

Iugardea»3 works are ayatematlo bul; hlghly abatraot and offer 
du« to thiä faot no apeoial target for Marxist oritiolsm eapeoially 
as he la & «rcaliaf in apiatemology ea againat bis teaohar B.Hasaerl 
who waa an "idealiaf.This queation was «ven the main bona of oonten- 
tioa between them. Uuoh more atteoked was the Xaading Polish historian 
of philotophj V/iadjalaw letarlclowioa whos« "Hlatary of Philcaophy" 
Witten mainly before the war waa a textbook in Polish a iTersities, 
Thia "üistory of Phlloöophi," now reprinted and eapeoially the 
third voloKie whioh encompaaaad the philoaophy of the goth oentury 
and dealt therefore with many figurea fleroely oppoaed by the Marxista 
for inatanoe Henri Bargaon, Sigmund ?read eto. But Tatarklewioa la 
oppoäQd to Genaan «xiatentlaliam ,He was deaoribed in 1953 by Adam 
Sohaff aa a man unlting elemento of neo-lTentianlsra and Mpohiam 
just those dcnounced by T.I.Lenin in hie "Materialiam and Bmpirioorltio- 
iam" «8 "reaotionery philosophy " .as "Ideeli-m" or "orypto-idealism" eto, 
Hot ooly Tate^kiawl^^a "PhilcsotJhT- of Hiatory waa printed or ratUer -^i^ 
reprinted but ^^f er the firat^-Hlatory of Aeathetioa" Wroolaw- 
rrakow, 1951 in two »oalmea enoompaaaing the aeathetioa of antiquity 
and Of the middlo ageadmtil Dante), Theee two volomes are of great 
BoUnt^:^ Talne eapeoially the text-book on medieval aeathetioa 
whiohrosjji' aoiae preparatory work done in thia fieldhy Mgar da Bruyna 

(Chent,3elgiaiii) .ä^rf la in tho faot the tirat '«wrtJt/Srthia kind, 

'4&)LPc^°'" ^^ ^'^^ preparet a third volame of hia work, 
:S^to'be also publi^hed in Sngliah by the Oxford Uhiversity Press 
In oonjuiiotion wlth the Poliah Offio« of State Publioationa whioh 
ooTer« the eoat of the tranalation. 


Another intareetlng republiootion was that of Stanislaw 


mach 8pi\0H to expresaioninn o«* ■«— .<i« 

i eesioniara and reallan.Phe nuaslan ver?lori of 

. .o.l«lo.I»t „, ,„ „.^,,, ^,„,,,^ _^^ ^^^^_^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ 
om .Koula «Uo «»utlou „o.h.r „..^„ phlU.,oph„ :„™i. 

Ä greafe deei of oaution. In her i«af- ««i, 

*v«. .n aer last mzic greeter worh "Bourgeola 

«» .«no.„ «.„j,^ ,„^j, „^.„. ,_ ^^, ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ 

If •peolf.toally boargaois laoraUto In If« «n^4i. « 
Of this brand of corsde Mer^^i;;;rrr^~^ , . 

m this perlod ^t.h«nd of the üWlvoreit, of ^roolaw. 

Th« wori. Of th. pr-wa. gencration of Poli.h phil^eophcz.. 
whioü fern* an a«too^i«äg.d p^rt cf the PolUh oultur.X herltug, 
1«. thu. ,lr.n free roln iu tha u.w^ ,,,,,, ,,, ,,, ^,,,^,„^ 

«Phaaval In 1905/06 o.eatad a new probU« for th. oor..,.l.t «• 
thi« wa. the .ooaUod ...l^i.„ i, ,,. ,,^. ,, ,,^ ^^^,^^ ^^^^^^^^ ' 
phllosophera. AAjkaA^ni^oMf^' 

MaTxlAm nn anoh -thl» mg lott to aome Alarxlata of the poot war 
genpratlcn. tx It Ig In thls oonnectiOD that Lho q^uoetlon aroae 
Bbont the pornisslble limite of üsrxiat tolerc^noe, about tha 
11ml ta of crltlclam h:^ the ^^oai g i^arxista : tixe (lUGation 
whether thea« crltlca wart ?.tlli x^arxlbtö • Shle was thüii 
an Internal problom of Marxist phlloüophy not of Pollsh phllcacpiiy 

^^t^liLi CI^lM^ 

a v;liOle^ Tho leadtng oersonallty of ''reTialoniEm»' of this kiud 
was Leaaelc Ka3:f>.kow3kl who flgur ad as the adltojc in ohlcf of tha 
nowly oreated "Sfcudla fil.zofloajne^ and a «dooenV of tha üülvareity 
of Wareaw^ TcvJnJlcowaki piibli?h^d in 1S57 a oollaotlon of csr.ass - 
originall;^ prititod in separate artlol^ö in 1956/56 - ontitlsd 
"Worldview nvA Sveryday Life" atronglv oritioal of the practloe cf 
Marxist Ideolcgy in Polaad.Ttissa esea:^8 were poleialc&l lu content and 
intcrt* Kol^kovfBlci ststad in the prefaoa of thio boot; 

••^h^ obecrvrtlona conteinod in this booklet ore rreralentl:; 
although not axolttsiraly darotad to tha daganSrata forma of 
Iiarxi3t thoüprht thnt have luidormined and daatxojed tho 
oraatlve oultural value» and tha inspirational power of this 
«ootrino ; to a crltiquG of a nihiliotio, primitive conöc^^t 
Of phlloaophloal oontrovcrey ; furtharmora of a drill 8eare:ont»a 
oonoept of intelleotTml aduoat,ion ; to a o^itique of a oon- 
oaptlon of moralB aa a tool of great historioal prooaaaeB 
(in tho article entitled : ''::h i?nd JUotifias tho Lloano^» ) • to 
a orlti^ua of a polioa^llJte theory of fraadom; to a critlaua 
Of a mlgar Interpretation of oaltaro aöoording to a soher^o«. 
One artiola oritioiaaa the raaily not very Marxiat oono^pt 
Of philosophy aß a methodolog^^ or ayntheais of 30lonoea# 
Anothar ona triaa to praaent hiimanism as a theory of raorala 
n©jnely,on tho baöia of a oritiiiie of the ^atholiox world v-»evv- 
another ona triea to daaoribe tha maln oharaoteristioa of ona' 
cf the forma of aooifUly effeotlve irratlonelism : antiserdti^m. 
Plnally ,tha laat ona whloh gare to tha book ita tltla triaa to 
polnt to the posaiLilitieü of a contribation of Philosoph^; to 
tha condaot of a maani^rfnl lifa# "^ x- ^ ^ 

Thia booJc waa tranalated into Oarman and publiahed In West 
Sarm^^nyt Biil \^]\en It appeared ,rolai:ow8ki ht^d to retraot hls vicvvs 

and to deol9,re thet the oontenta of the bock dld not repreaent hia 
Tlowa anj more. Tiere thon the limita of the perinifiaibla wera trana- 
greosed aad ^volakowski waa silenoed» On the oae hand the Poliah 
lutho^-ltiea oo^ild not afford the loaa of Kolakowakl-Jje/M&^s^ilftAi^^^ 


^^l^^^eA^^^"^^ tut he too Jtod to find 

an eeooncöj,tiCu vdth tlxe pov/ere that b©, 

no Fabl5.»hod th^reafter hia nioüt iiüportant 

worJi: ,rL-jaßl3 ^*-^o 

iudivi'luiift' anä, tho infinit« ^ I 

Freedoia aud the 

antlnOi^las oj? frcjodorr. in tlie philösopii;; of ipino^ia^ »(Waraaw lOüO] 
ThlK is no nonoßraph ou ^pinoi&a in I,li3 uouiil ^cn^St i'iiö aathor 

dec!?arcB that he vanttö, to iiitt^^pret 

"tfeo alaaaioa?. problems of Philosoph? as philoaophy of norale 
and to treralatr» the ^utibtiom of laetüph^JOloa^anthrüpolöK^ eoid eplafcemo 
logy into tinestlons aefe in tho language of huiian moral« Problems; 
thelj- scheret hui^n^nicitic oontenta shouid be uncovexed ♦jhe (^atötion 
of Dolty shonld be pros«ntrjd aa tho proolßm of man; Uw probl^m of 
heaven enö itjrtU ee thct of kai^an froödom ;t,hc prcblei^ixof öat.«re 
ae that of the ralation of sran to th« world; the tyroblem of th© 
aoul es t;h£.^ öf the vaiao oü life..,,^^ 

J^olcikowfcidL l3 an agiiostia mio waata äo 
red'ioo tLc tre.ditlcnc-i th«ricl< giaal a id metaph:^sioal problem« iuöo 
modern •»hT^nian^ ter^aa •IIa «-«.r^x^saed oisill^AX viaw» in an OiApubiitiaed 
bronftoaat of the Itoiiloh radiOK fon Jjj^ 2|lSG0)*IIa ätatea tuere 
that üie :a^iin proglcaa o£ t/h^ologj/ wüloh v»öre tai;.an oyqx aj tra.di- 
tional artaplijoloß aro thd baelo problema of human anthroj^ology^ 
The first cf thc&e Is the probltm of eeohatolog^^ whioh impliea the 
Problem of prcgrorju^^ Thie iToolem waö settled in a differönt way 
by Cbrl3ti?.n e.tlstcntlallctöp^bj I^^arxlsta and b^ algiuU ä 1'reu.d, 
The ^;>robleu-how stiould cna liyo? for the üioüiant or Tor «ittrnitj? - 
la the aanc b^xt tho anv^were aro nct valid for ovör^bod^« Ihon thoro 
is the x;rcblßD or thsodicj^Haa hTm^an Guffering uny siojjöo^^lt haö 
ona for thß lH?ltits bat one mut>t aoo«pt in thio oaao thöirK piomlöes, 
Thoro ie in hmann n;ntare an inbtiuot of JäCl£-a;>ct;rtiou bu; ala<^ 
a yearuing for au Absolabo ^^hloh la its oppooito* Ihoialöt philoeophy 
aaaa In thle jear/uin^ a doairo to oone at rost^to be reauite^d v>vith 
th# Orator* Bnt tUero aro other anövjdra that vjcpiaiu th« jeainiag 
for an Aböoliitu: !•) ^igiuuad i'röud hau ioriiAu th<; tUoorj of uhö 
d©ath in^tlnot whloh io in opj>0;-.itiou to who ^iibido^; Aocordin^; ^o 


t.U IITIBS .»tt„ w..ta to r,mn .. U. l^orsoulo .tat. and to 

law States that tili orsanlaiM try to aouxave 

sic&ll«at effor* and "sV taa 31™:-.!.'»= 

j» 4.U4« 1--.1. Tta thlrd form ia oontainod in 

. * I »*.o'-a« '•hfit nll ahapölaaa aystawa try to 
geatalt pa^oKoLog? wliloh .ha. -all an P 

u 4 v.-,«.^ i-erxlnr on^ ajirm.etrical forioa.Ia cU« x.urth 
realiae th-* ^Inploat reg-iif^r o^i a# 

.u . th. ^rincip^e of .Joen-?-n 3ari;re tUat everj; Uumn 
plaoe theri» l3 tlie ptincip-e «^ ^ ^ , ^ , ^ ^, 

.,i„, tri., tc r,l.. 1...1» "» '^« uon-onUt, / 0. ^.1=6 "' 

... a..»»c.lon Of i.,i^.«lU,..Ul t.e3, .ootria^a r.U. ... X« 

of eatTOps to the statin- ot a & ^, „<. 

..oxttion Of all fo...a of te.eio..t.t^^ H.^ :niud ie al.o au.Jeot 
to this 1.. bnt if thio 1.. ««- t.on there .ould .a uo^, .inoa ita Hinter, i. deter^niuud ., t.o aearo. for an 
...olut. and a fli..t .efo.o it... t.o anxie., .0 .oa« oue^a i entit . 
..o...t d,t...ined -0, ont.0.0. U oonoo.vativ, ..iu..^«-o. ..o.ev. 

.e a^'«e.s .gSÄ'o, Ua oppoaite. t.e prooaao 0. ino.aaaed tau io^. 

xl ax of .^.. o-.Xt..a eve.. ...l.te .oo..e. ..e v.t.. of a 

n.^ orltloism .here.pon i a ne.- Ab.oiate i. eraoUd. 

^u ;,- thnt ^ersistod in hi^tory imoKaliangaa 
TJe jcnow nr> mathoda tüat pexsisu« 

. . , ^,n Ol» vitaiit-j l)3oauae thos oraated 

l,ut we no theorlos t!ia^^ romaxa f-oll of nta^xTi, tH,.,.l..a tools of s.If.c.iticia. .von if t.e, oon.ained 

30«. do^ti,..n.,a» in t.air original for.ulation.. 

But ...y *.* withln t.e.e.l.e3 Inatra^enta cf »el..t..uaoena.on. 

But twy OR ..,,^iau, Phonü.aonologs aM pasaUoanaljal». 

-"his ia tjru« in cur tlm«B of Uarzxam, pn^a */ 

. ♦. Tt 1 - truo ^Ixat üVoi-3 oue üf theao ohao^iea 
Ihercfore th^V poraia*. It i. t.ruo ;.uav 

*• „ .^ ^nr-it-^r^s who rapeat tho original foriaulaa. 
poseeoa orti\odox par.ltans wn« *- 


and th»ir oppon«tnti "fch« -roola". 

Ord«r 1« not opposad to «n snfcl-ab30l-tt:.Ufe pUiioacphy 
bat ther, are two klad. of ord«r:cn. that lea^.g di.«ra.,ie» 
tmtouohed and th. pollo« .rder U.he ordor d' e oo.prci..nalva 
oard-lndox. W ,onld Uke ord« W be :^ lnt«li«etaaU, aotiv a sooiat, whoao oxletlu. ntjthologj is lu a .tat. of deoa, 
thero arlaa new „^th. tak«n fror,, tec^nclog,. o^- t,e .xao. .oion««a. 
Slxe ai^helaf tore tholr aainta .nd th. blaCera fcü.ix ahrin«. 
W« ar. for a phllosophy of w^tohf-an.cs againet everj Absoluta , 
- aro for tue poaaibllit, of non-mt.Ucotual valu.»..« aie for a' 

Tislon Of a wwld «her. th. :.o.t IrrcccnalUblo haw. aotivUi.. 

are fus.4: goodn«, wlthont Indnl^^nc*. aonras. .Uiiout fanaUolom. 

lnt>elllg«no, wlthout dasmlr and hcre -vlthoat blladuoaa.Ali othar 

fmita of phHosophloal thonyht aro aateporteni. 
Wa saa hora that K«>l5ko,.kl aaaa tha mo.t rodaaioing Ä6p««i, of 

Uarxiara it ita abiUtj of aalf-tr.naoond.noo and that ha i.uctapoa.« 

It Nflth Phanomanoj/'and p.5chonnnl;.Ma .?ro3crlbod la «u^ia. aa 

thraa ««hx« dootrlnat of «imiiar « Import. How far this writar 

1» a -llarxlat" le of oouraa an opan q.noation. 

In Poland many hold tho vlaw th-t iucä wrlters aa 

Kolakowaki baoama Karxlat. dne to tha prarauug couälticna in 

Poland and of oouraa ^n^Hu^la but nobod, doabt. that tha ofnoial 
Mi^xiat r.hllotäophar/1« a oonrlnoed Vorx*^t, aS^^-i„. r - 

and dlploaatlc raatraii^S^^i^^jrt^^rrwrJLr.t poiut oi vlsw ha ^aa 
alwajf a mlddla of tha road m-n. 3r^n whon editlng nJs^l Pllc^ofloana- 
ha angagad in thaoratloal poler^ioe rdth thc r«dloal .v5a.g oi -arxiam. 

He ia not ona of thoaa Uarxiat« who orv "ttoi^ «him f^- - 

wQü ory vTcif" when thej faoa any dootrin 


begottcn in sin !.•• by botirgaola thlnker« ,he wonl« rathrr apply 
oraf>t;l73 Oiitiloisiu szuL Inooprporat« in M-jttIsf. 'rhnt apreals to hie 
oojsr/oa »juiua«, au abaard dogiaetiam wonld not ba Harxiot, aofiaff 
lcoij^«a ftli t,ti8 UniT«r«lty of Balgj-aaa althonffli thls i<: anpjoaad to 
bo a citau«! of ravisioniom in Ru8«1ä, Hla Inat whlioaUion of 
greutcr soopa "Introtiuotion to aamantlo« (Watop do eennn.t:'!:! ) 
(WarsaK 1961, ö44 pagea) illuatrate« the polnt maSa aT)orc, In »ihio 
bock hfi diaottäöea the itigllsh and Anerioon theorles of ^rvaaaine, 
t'ixf:x&x.ii0x9 irixa thaorj of aiga8.3ohaf.f tpjcep a rathrr T)0HitiY9 

3tQM tüvi,iu\i thaae tliaoriea and thia wea rrldaly/ncf io«d In :.'? 'lirt 

(^nJ;A Jk' utiai; -i^öorjui poauanya oliehohey «umantli-l " fTbf^cry of rY,owiö4g« 
of z^^V^ ^i*mauiöioftj i^erevan 1909,318 ppj In s rovleu of tSie 
lattcr ^a "i?iioQo:irioi^ Oaaopls" pabUshed in l>tn^n by t;he Oi:eoho- 

Tondl €.Lutiift |pp*(Ä2-Ga9 ) tiiat while 

lohrzff d0Ole.rcs "litvral-^ 

Xj" iu hia bouk ion page ßlO) that he wante fco"rehabilltric - »^eiu^aiitloa 
in -*^,x'xx»t; «•jöö «and nialce« perhep» In thie end^civor tco cr^^- ccucei^üion« 
to tx, bourgöoi« thonght« Brutl&n's strn«pe>lnt If» sbr.rr>lT; crlticrl thus 
folloviiiAg the older contributlona of 3y]chor8H,Cr«tgr3-5.n, Trofinov ^ScroLanko 
• to» v;hiah wero howoTöi? of a " populär laslng land journnllatlo charaotar''* 
Uovj Bi ^.oibüx ohoo^es a target of minor l.portano« ,nam6l.7 tho jnnerr:.! 
etmantiöa of i^or^yböJEl in Amarioa wliilo Sohaff who Ic imioh b^^tter- 
infoimcd wuOttt öiae iingliiih i* and Amsrloan llt^^Mtrurt? In *(,hl% fisld 
apeafcö about öha thaorioe of known aoholara fO^/lenj^iofincdo ?to,J 
Hot oulj c^öiauiibiga in a na^ro.var aanaa wre rajeoted in TMe.fe.ia#Even 
tha firct text^ooi: of mathematloal logio was publißhad in Hocoow 
in 1359 : P^-S» aorücor: "i^lamanty laatac^ \^^y^ f^lcüxenti 
>f mixthe.Mxi/loal logio)« 

Scuafr^o oiiutr writin^o inoiuda "Iba üonoept 4>rjd the rord''; »»on tUo 


eum««! "ii,t.ty..« whoce .hi.iT .dltcr U ...m .at...i«.io,. 

thr 69si»noe cf tblnc;-«. -^ j6'.' t^i^ tu^^r*. n^ . ., ^ 
a F^ograir and aaaU!. otioa au * ^oijUs;#% ,-«i«^ ,,at«ft ad«s iia-.xj 

tbai "t-U,-. oiolfciua ui' kar^.oa -A:irx,M«6i« »aa i^uiu idi't m 


exfar,uf^lT» worit» or teiAt)Oc>a on n<»fth©tlo« " (whioh 1« tmdiiniabl«) 

!i'bB5> MBa« J.noiaenl;ol r«t'erlce about psitionl^x work» that. eppeel«* 
io t.he» nnt thoa» leraari:« hhvo no •cl'jntiflc ▼p.lue, Aft fvt soeiallst 
»•»lisia ,itJ i8 a progrem ,not a aoaertiflo theorj.A liarxiat thcory 
of aeethetica taxmk ren»ln« still to b« oonoeiv«d. - - T% «;oee 
Tflfchottli iwjlnft ttuit such "horefciocl " rlewü aouia nevor aoo tha light 

of dj?.? in Sovlftt BusBln» 

Uo7ai;8}cl*a MRrxlota Is isore apr-stent In hta hlstorlod 
•ßöfij« sapeeiaLly Sf n^iaJi pirscr^ilitiee of thc vmt axe oonoerned. 
2h'3s In hie löte publioatloa " 3ttidi& z hlatorll rrr^slt aatstyofpaaj 
iVlII l xrx «Ifl» " ( »tudl«» ©f the älatoxy of ststhefeio tbota^ht 
iß th« IStiij fttia » 19t!i otaturla») h« Tmdertafcee & »«|>rograB0ifa « 
rteraa^tioa ol' th< ?ollsh ISth cct-tury pfailcecph»« and aeathetl- 
clar.B Earol Llbelt mü Joaef ßreraer. VJhlle th«a« ooneervatiTc thelat- 
Ic Hs'-elistta er« »töucod lu slae end Mnlaiaad, another YJrlt;er 
Köv-rrd PöiAbo?Tak'- aofvre«!:» mwtianeflpi« died in hla yonth onfi wot;« 
ll'u-tla- -baciciaea-ttB ß left nlng TIft,^ell.«ci ^nä a ppogpsa-ira domoorat- 
tta« to^otijxe ne^o aS .?oliah acsthatici in IMü. 3ueb rea?|r^^i8al.^ 
nr» t-spioal In tha "rowriting" of historj. Cut ^»^ töUd9uola8(lra 
eo^joely 4i»o«nible in the traatiuent of uha Ungllah aeathetloJÄU« 
of th« IBnii ocntfJT -for laetcnoa adsnmd Burko and/oi tha Franohnton 
nippol«to -ralna. It le trna thfit the Jtaellah thlnkors sra llntad with 
the oonditlona of the ängliaä bonrgsoia ooolet? of t.hat tli» but 
aioh an vialyals oould ter-s baon done 3uät afi well bj ang aooiolo- 
dlontly orif'ntad nonJfciXxlot vorlter» 

Morawaki*« appolatn»nt to tlia ohüir of latarkiewlo» 
111-j.atret«« on th« ottiar twn« e f»ot of ^^olish a, Iroralty Ufa. 
Aa '-he es« o^ letlremaut for nnlvaraits po&ltionß cae sat at 70 
nnd cor,t of tht pre-was phUc»OT»h«»a hor^t around öhat aga, t^t 
„..,..«. iUr^-iofc« fiisDlaoe the non-l»*rxlat« rla faotl\yM>\^^. 


H^Ä v^^^^ -in 11133- ia will De laßürdeTi'd fcorn^ IS ...virxlawa nra 

prr}f4XJ05, fvr U?:r.lV0i"3lti; ::>oe 

1. 41 J 

Oivi.If ^irjtlj^ä^u üe3o;:.oa a felokot fot 

sohoJrrrs p.^;- at Icast. 11p si^tigö to %fx;^fim in .oLcui^* r;ili th 



oolo \rrj ? 


'iäl- ^'i.'jetlö- *5/an3*v^r3'Ä in ?/>h5 way bi^ Aola^n 3v5*iar 

-«► *^ 


art-i-3l>) " JjtniLüJ- 1 latonla iol^ki-S Ülojofii' (vt'auatinn nna 

tj^ahtt o.^ Pi^-lleli :^fillv,o-?ii3) pifcli^hea Vj \ih- 


!'Uj 'ftow^J r^rogi' 

(ao?.' 'a^a) , tlifei ^'theor^t 

.aal ^?aiÄ :poliiioal ^:v^u^i of thc O^nXral 

Coiumltt«?? of thd rrnltcd -xli.-ra Wor5:i?r0» ^irl^^ in ib ^ yj&rch l^sue 

of 1C61 fp.e?). m 

a up r?. 1:a3.a£ice- i-Iicst' ei4 flnd^ ou thi? pc:rltlT€ 

»iclf* or the: lc4r:^>r iktt tiw intr-ll^ottiöl CM.art8 cf IIcJxXbw. h$ivc b 


thi^r^ Ir* ö i,iÄrxisi; avcilalle^ i^cogOiifciYiüu oiaij cvrrooj»« in plillonopliy 

But it In by tio '(eane ihr taöi: ol ttc i,di^ir4.,trallo«'. to i^raöioat© 

In .:ol>ieh j::kUci^op]:i;/* ?I^op;3sltlvl:jni Ucö Jiaxclj hu. ^i tie velivia. 
It ia ''<?. hur.dr^ tiiüca*' olO'^sr ta ferxiöc: thon ^'Iilvi.^.r»* fi^^u 
Or>tho?lc phlloicphy) ^Tt ir not crj r.scre thc Liclrt lincU*.totiJel 
ep7;cnfnt. Kcw *M* reift iarOü in thc raake of tl*.^ 50'<-}ue; in- 
tellcctiUilö by ^aciGt^ntlcaicra crA i'iuöiöiV^*^-^ tJ^rortb tJa jU. Lo 
41rir0t«A if*«iinat tiioeü) o'^trren^iO» i^ 

l©!irninß c>o tlirit tJicJr pocitiva c.o^icTi:.ricut;G ol'.u.u. iiot Lc üvo;:»,li'=?lm« 

iu ouurw: u coT.i.r^bcrJLülvo hl. tur^ of PoXi^h jliilo.ophs alfiOt ih« 

rrfaai« ag»«l and a hiHt;oii*y cf Polirjh A3*ir.ninT.! (in oh^. ;->'ric4 of 

-i.'ol5.r»h JrTctontavitii^i?! in thf 16* h ocntiiry)» In thcee ilalcL» tUö I£arxl8t 
critlol^m giaoi Oül:? ir^hfTjccjt' jernpo.lng opl^J-'^'-ai» üuyoi:i':ir/^ettar aolu- 

fidolotat Thode ere wcrsf» encmlec of t-arxlsm thsn :fe±ir ^cci cl4 ucopo- 

K»:!; %hxv^ 'ae holl^w ,*i not utijal!röd bl^ysölng» 

V0lnnö lue ao oontrol» Mt tto^*» ir- llMile ir; vüc UudiwXLU oX iMxiah 








"n / 


2?i/^^ ^ /%/c>^^4 


»• • 


Datum des Poststempels 

Sehr verehrter Mitarbeiter! 

Das Manuskript unseres 1. Bandes wird in Kürze dem Verlag 
übergeben. Wir bitten Sie deshalb, zur Vermeidung kostspieliger 
Satzkorrekturen die Bibliographie der von Ihnen verfaßten oder 
bearbeiteten Artikel durch Nachtrag eventuell neu erschienener 
Literatur auf den neuesten Stand zu bringen - und zwar bis 
spätestens 30. November 1969. 
Mit bestem Dank für Ihre Bemühungen und freundlichen Grüßen 

Schriftleitung des 


erau$gegeben von den Professoren Waller Brugger, Hans-Qeorg Qadamer, Romano Quardini, Helmut Kuhn. Helmufh Plessner 

Sdiriftleitung: Professor Dr. Walter Brugger 

Lexikon der Philosophie. Sdiriftleitung, 8 MQndien-SoUn,Sohnd(estr.17 


Prof. Dr. Max 
59I0 West 
121e Street 

R i e s e r 

New York 27 



Sohndcestraße 17 
Telefon 797417 

ihr Zeidien 

Ihr Sdirelben vom 

Unser Zeidten 



August 1966 


Sehr geehrter Herr Professor! 

Das LEXIKON DER PHILOSOPHIE, das von den oben Genannten her- 
ausgegeben wird, will in enzyklopädischer Form das philoso- 
phische Wissen und die philosophische Problematik unserer 
Zeit darstellen. Dieses lexikalische Kompendium, gedacht als 
eine Leistung nicht einzelner oder einer Gruppe oder philo- 
sophischen Schule, sondern der Gemeinschaft der Philosophie- 
renden in Deutschland und Jenseits der Grenzen Deutschlands, 
möchte dem Studium der Philosophie und der philosophischen 
Forschung dienen. Die große geisteswissenschaftliche For- 
schung der ersten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts verlangt nach 
enzyklopädischer Zusammenfassung des Geleisteten. In der 
Philosophie und im deutschen Sprachraum fehlt bisher eine 
solche Enzyklopädie. Das LEXIKON DER PHILOSOPHIE wird sich 
im Unterschied zu anderen geplanten Unternehmungen nicht auf 
die Behandlung der Begriffe oder die geschichtliche Darstel- 
lung beschränken, sondern sowohl die Begriffe der philoso- 
phischen Tradition wie auch in biographischen und interpre- 
tierenden Artikeln die Philosophen und die philosophischen 
Schulen und Bewegungen behandeln. 

Um an schon getane 
die 1957/58 erschie 
zugrunde, ohne uns 
zu fühlen. Vielmehr 
zung als Grundlage 
tikel soll durch ei 
derlich erscheint, 
neuen Artikel erset 

Vorarbeit anknüpfen zu können, legen wir 
jedoch an den Text dieses V/erkes gebunden 

soll die von uns hergestellte überset- 
für eine Neubearbeitung dienen. Jeder Ar- 
nen Sachkenner geprüft und, wo das erfor- 
entweder umgearbeitet oder durch einen 
zt werden, überdies werden neue Artikel 

- 2 - 

Bankkonto: Kreissparkasse MOndten, Hauptzwelgstelle Pulladt, Konto-Nr. 57 080 (Prof. Dr. W. Brugger) 

- 2 - 

Zur Zeit sind die Vorbereitunp-en durch Bereitstellung eines 
deutschen Textes soweit p;ediehen, daß die Bearbeitung des 
ersten Bandes vorgenommen werden kann. Dürfen wir dafür mit 
Ihrer Mitarbeit rechnen und Ihnen folgende Artikel zur Bear 
beitung anbieten? 

Aj dukiewicz 


Anbei erhalten Sie zu Ihrer Information eine Mappe mit den 
Allgemeinen Richtlinien, einem Artikelmuster sowie einem 

Sobald wir Ihre zustimmende Antwort erhalten haben, werden 
wir Ihnen als Arbeitsunterlage die deutsche Übersetzung obi- 
ger Artikel und Manuskriptpapier sowie weitere Arbeitshilfen 
zusenden. Sollte Ihnen selbst die Übernahme der genannten 
Artikel nicht möglich sein, so wären wir Ihnen zu Dank ver- 
pflichtet, wenn Sie uns Personen benennen könnten, die nach 
Ihrem Urteil zur Bearbeitung obiger Artikel befähigt sind. 

Indem wir Ihrer Mitarbeit gerne entgegensehen, sind wir 

mit freundlichen Grüßen 

Schriftleitung des 


(F. Bader, wiss. Assist. ) 

New jTork, den 27.1,1967 

Herrn y.Bad«r,wiaa.Asa, Sedaktlon 
Lexikon der PnJloeor^h*« 
8 München 71, * 

Sohnokeatr, 17 

Sehr geehrter Ht»rr a^der, ^ 

A1dt3H«w4rt, ;i«, , -^ ^^ Anhnpc Bonde loh lianea den Artikel 

hJ £f ^A ^??' ^eT=?inbr''nnf^t.erirf»s 6? agilen tm^fa^-aen toHte. 
PloS^LlL oi^S*^/r^®^ ^'^ "«" ürundtext aid auf "die 
follfS Un«« Ü!:- '^I'^""^'':"-^^^' Biographie kenn Rope^^neü 
lieh <^ T^« •'■®? f»^^2t werden, wenn diea Uübediu^t arfoxder- 

ntlhl !!!•**•.£**.-" ''*''• *'*^"» Sprachen verfaasten AufsLtae sind 
T-r erbeut!, Ob si- we'^";eJ.»?.ween werden ecllen.weil üIp in ce>- ooln! 
JS^J^f^J^'ä^? mexBteaa In. dattaelwerk "äpiaaha und i?keuütSa! 
^«nfS?i*' 3''^r;:ft«" t" 2 Banden" rorhandea 3lad,jcaaß loh Soht 
Zo^eSiioSl??^^'^!"^:?? ^J^^td! wlohtigsten Aufaat.e «um "radikalen 
^-ü !^ ^^^®'°S! **• ^'^ "BTk.«nntnin " naohsingnder 1934-36 m- 
druokt worden. Die letatan,methodoi. and Inüaktxonaiogiüohan luf- 
qt! vH*'^'^* wlel«rtin In fr?:, und en?rl. '?ln^?ln,n.f8ät««nVeifbar. 
fiLi^rr "^S,^^^^^^!?.^^ ^^«^ aiialaaaen.dooh mdf,aten die zueilt 
aneeführten Büoh?r "O^-fia'-f^ite 3flhrlfton", "Prpgtr'f.tlaoh'« Loslk" 

fctn" wohf*Li^°f f » "•^'J' '*:?^ Methodologie der dedoktiven Wiaaenaohaf- 
ten wohl holümon w«rlen."D-'r Abrl-?? d.-r --orlk" iat f^in Lehrbuch. 
, ? poln. In vielen Auagaben eraohlenen lat, Dia vorhergf-headen 
lehrbnohartifT^-n ;3afirlfton nntl Ar.iri'ip« «nf? <lpr -^hilof?. rJterpt'jr 
die mit A'a Torreden und Anmerkungen versehen alnd, wurden überheupt 
nicht angeflh:*t,i'nl-!.3 1*.- '.7M.nroh'>n,d->qn Uh fl\n F^'-ranff^n -:n der 
Biographie unö Elblloprnpble aelbat vornehme, dann bitte es mir mit- 
zuteilen ^^2.^''"'''' G?f3n'"*ü'!aT,\<3ss är^r 2on„n tn jofler dar drei Sparten 

?^??*3?^* »^i^e^^P*»^" '='"^"S"li06raphle"peBondert anzugebon.'ö 
aüühu Ihnen a^or r.noh f'el '.He rüramgi^n i^nr 3iO'--rct!hlP und Blbl-'o- 
graphle eelbat vorzunehcen. " ' 

,^ ,^ ^ ^, ,. ^i® i^r Bugeaandte Ital, ifesaung vmr teils 

korrektur- tflla rv^^n.-^irngabetl^rftlg und koun vrrsndhar. Sr.n aollte 
m.B. angeben-daaa A. mütterllohercelta deutscher Absteaf^ung war. es 
gfh*auch nicht an zv. s-?.gpu,?r ael 1n aö-t1nt?fln mdLeip.hflrg erzopen. 
5r war In Guttingen nur zwei Scmoater hlndaroh.m^oUdeu oi bereits 
cgs DCKtoret bexntia und Gj"Tri»'oJTl.1<^h-«»7« u-^T.i.;-» h^-'tc Ta- ae--T u^d 
Hllbort ohne aloh für die Philosophie des erateren zu' intereaaiereu. 

Mit vorzüglicher Hochachtung 

^ diiB 

N* York,len ?J.,n, 1969 


1. v>A 

»* ^ I3 

Vsrehrliche Red«iktl 




In Anhang ari mein l^^t«, '^rhrHh-n . 

-nreibsn trafre loh noch 

' •"^Vl.u.^-a.gaxv 11^7/6ü, (x.iora 1909) 

fOX Hieaii' 

A» , 


lierautgcgeben von den Profeisoren Waller Brugger, Hani-Qeorg Qadamer, Romano Quardlnl, Helmut Kuhn. Helmuth Pleasner 

Sdtrtftleitung: Professor Dr. Walter Brugger 

Lexikon der Philosophie, Sdirlftleitung, 8 MOndien 71,Sohnd(eslr.17 


Prof. Dr. Max Rieser 

519 West 121 Street 

New York, N.Y. loo27 



Sohndtestraße 17 
Telefon 7974 17 

Ihr Zeldien 

ihr Sdireiben vom 

Unser Zeidien 



28. Oktober I966 

Sehr verehrter Herr Professor I 

Für Ihren Brief vom 29. September, in dem Sie sich zur Bear- 
beitung des Artikels "Ajdukiewicz" für das LEXIKON DER PHILO- 
SOPHIE bereit erklären, danke ich Ihnen vielmals. Ich hoffe, 
daß die Länge des Artikels und der Termin für die Rücksendung, 
die Sie beide dem Mitarbeitervertrag entnehmen wollen, Ihren 
Vorstellungen entspricht. Vom Vertrag bitte ich Sie, zwei Ex- 
emplare unterschrieben zurückzusenden . 

In Erwartung einer guten Zusammenarbeit und 

mit freundlichen Grüßen 


(f. Bader, wiss. Ass.) 


Bankkonto: Kreissparkasse MOndien, Haupizweigstelle PuUadt, Konto-Nr. 57 080 (Prof. Dr. W. Brugger) 


gailmiara Jd ui ciewlo^i (ia9C-196g) 

•■ • "• , • . ■ .' ■. , . -•■■*.. ■ , ' '' 

faBlmit?2 /iH^i^^ios .belongs^^to the ««cond generatlcm of JktCK phll080ph(»r 

0f tli5 XrOT sohool of phlloaorhy fonndnd (1898) bj hl» teaoher Ifazlmlerz 

• ..■■'•.- ' • " ■ 

fifasrdowakl Tieima«*born dlaolpie of Pran» Brtnteno^A papil of Twardowaki^s 

''',■'■ , ,.■.•- 

Jan ;^«fili:aale^l02 i^r^atcr of sj^mbollo loglo in Poland^vas also amoiig 

Ajdtüclewloa^a taaohera at Ltov Univerait^F^AjdUiClöwioa ^tadled crigiuaily 

»athoniatioa and pliyalo» aaö. taucht th^ae subJeotB at a Lrov »'gyrmaaitim*^ ^ 

after hie dootorata »He then apant a ytar (1913/14) In Göttlagen ^Ith * 

David Illlbert and Sdnrind ÜUüaarl» Uls niain oonoern beoasae methodolog? 

of eoienoa # He was «>uader the Influenoa of Bartrand Ins sali. Ooatarat. 

Hilbert a d othars'«- tha Tlrät thlnk^r' In ^^oland toapply nvothar^iatiocAi 

•. ' . -• ■ • ' ' ■ ■ ' ' 

logio to tha problaom of fonoal Impllöatlpn^than to tho^a pf proof and 

**»xi;^teaoa** iia formrl aoienoaa« iUa oreatlva oontrll/uclou to äe^iantio 

. "•'... ■. - ' . ■ •''■■".' ' ' ' 

philosopli; was Mkm a ^j^tam of ^^xa41oal oonTantionallam^ i an axten&ion 
of üanri Polnoare^a idaaa Into th^ 'liold of aaaantloa# Aooordlng to thia 
theoTj^ thera ara opan^ bloaad and oomiaotlve lnn^;uagüa«ThG lattfx t¥;o 
daterialna dui to thelr Immutable 'oonooptual apparatus flxad intraaslat- 
abl6**world rlawc**« 7halr atraotura oontalna axioi&atlo«daduotiva and ^ 

auiplrloal "diraotlrat" of naanlng whioh ererybodj? who undaratanda tha 
Xanifaagt In qneatlon^muat ao&pt - or 1B riolata lt. By neans of hla sainant 
Ajdukiav/icz rafuted the Idaallara of Berkalay and Hlo.kfrt as ^langaagea^ 
Aiffaring from tho&a of natural soienoa and ayaryday lifa« Aooaaad by 
Pollsh iSarxiata (A •Schaff.) of Idjanlisni aM aoeptioiam,tia atated that ha 
abandonad after 19Ä6 hlsJ aamantio thabry aa "papar flotion''\defanded 
Judioiously tha fraedOTn of aolentlflo Inraatlgatiön^derotad hlnaalf to 
the atudy of Indaotion and*tho oöriatruotion of an languaga of aolenoa 
wlthcut axlomatio or daductlva dltaotivea. 



of mixed Poliah -Auatrian parentag« 
Fazimierz Ajduklewloz belongs to the seoond generation of the Lvov 

aohool of philoaophy and logio founded In I«vov by Kazimierz Twardowski 


a aiciple of Pran« Brentano tÄxXtMSKK.Jfin Lukasiewicz the oraator of 

aymbollo logio in Poland was also among hi3 teaohers aa a ^'dcoeat" at th 


Lvov Universits •Ajdakiewicz' a main ooncern was the atad^ of the me- 

thodology ofsoienoe->although his unlverait^; atudies MMsaaxfiKKSMk were 

nathematics and physios and he beoame first a teaoher of mathematioa 

and phj^aica in a Lvov High aohool fg:7mnasium) .after his dootorate and 

then (and Bdinind Huaaerl) 

heard 1913-14 David Hoilbert in Goettingen. He was the first thinker 

in Poland to apply in Poland maohematioal logio under the inf luenoe 

of %rtrand Husaell ,Couturarand ,i^avid Hubert and others ay mathematio 

al logio to the Problem of «irlrirrint imp±ication«He then dealt with 

the Problem of proff and existenoe in the formal aoienoes^ 
oonoept where the 

of truth as iised in natural soiencea has no appllcation« 

Hia main oontribation to soientifio philoaophy lies in the field of 

aemantica»He evolved a aystem of "^radioal oonventionaliam" an extenaion 

of Henri Poinoare^a oonventionaliat ideas.Aooording to thia theory 

there are open,oio3ed and oonneotive languages 

• Ihe two latter varietie 

determine the nature of oertaln intranalatable world viewa o-ing 

to their oonoeptaal unohangig ap^aratua. Their straoture implies 

immutable axiomative and deduotive and empirioal directive s of 

meaning whioh everybody who understanda the language in c[ue8tion 

9uat aooept otherwiae he viol tea the rules of the language in 

queation, But language within the oonoept of AJdukiewioz has a 

very definite meaning .^e apeaka for inatanoe of the language of 

Berkeley or of Hiokert meaning their universe of conoepts. Attaoked 

by ^arxiata of soeptiticim and ^hnihiliam and idealiam AJdukiewioz declaij 

that he abandoned thia therry after 1936 and conaidered it as a 

**paper fiotion**« ^e defended ^however^the liberty of aoienoe in a 

programmatlo artiole whioh trled to adjuat that liberty to the prevalllu 

politloal oondot iony. He devoted his last yeara to the problem 

of induotion. anü to the Organization of the teaohinga of logio i:i Polan 


. ■ - ^ • ■• ••'•..•■ 

Kaiimierz .ydukiewicz -of rr.ixed PoLish-Vieao9S9'Parentage is one of 

philosphera of th. Lvov sohool of P^^^^^^^Pj^^/^^f J^g^Sl^ir. ^^^''^ 
^v fttK..Ka2ii.lerz Sardowakithe/main reformer of the philoaophical 

'" . • . .. •■.<••• 

atudiea in Poland..a dläcipla of Franz Brentano.Twardowaki and the oreator 

of aymbolio logio in Poland Jan Lukaaiewicz, a pupil of Twardowaki, 
wer« Ajdukiewioz-a teachera who atudied at the Lvov üniveraity primarily 
mathematica and physioa-apart from philo sophy .After his doctorate in 
LVOT and after hav ng been appointed a teaoher of mathematica and phyaio 
in a LTOV gsmnaaium Ajdukiewio» apent a sear (1913-14) at the Göttingen 
UniTeTait, with David Hubert (and alao Bdmuad äuaserl). Hla niain oon- 
oern became methodology of aoienoe.He waa the firat one in Poland to 
apply-uhder the influenae of Bertrand RnaaeU.Couturat,«* Hubert and 
othera -mathematioal logio to the problemaof of fotmal implication 
then alao*of proof and«exiatenoeMn the formal aoiences .Hia main 
oreative'oontribution to soientifio philosophv v;aa the evolvement 
of -a aystem of radicalr Convention. llam -an extenaion of tHenri 
Poinoare'a ideaa of conventlonaliam in aolenoe .into, the field of 
semantica.Aooording to thia theor, there are open.olosed and oonneotive 
langaages.of whioh the t wo latter av^termine the nature and content« 
of !iSU intranalatable world -viewa due to their a.ohanging conceptual 


apparatua.Their structttre impliea immtable axiomatic,deductivö and 
ampirical directivea of meaning whioh everybods who u^deratanda the 
language la Sound'?? aooept -or othe.wiae to violate ita läwa.Ajdukiewic. 
availed himaelf of hi. aemantio conoepts to retute the idealism of 
Bexkele, and Rickert aa "langaagea; differing from ^^os|^jf -^^"^ 

30ienoe.-evertheleaa hewaa attaoked b. Poliah >rxiata of idealism 
and aoeptioim and atated in defense that he abandoned the theor, of 
olosed and oonneotive langagea after 1936 as «paper fiotiona". He devote 
his laat yeara to the theor y of induction and the conatruotion of an 

««pirioal language of aoianoe withont dednotive or axiomatio premisea 
»fii^nL ne oongiderad as possible.Ha organzied the atudiea of logio 
oomJSistic polanS?' ""^ *"'' defended Ubert. of acience in 







(öallÄien)p 12,Doz. 1390, r^a 12*Aprt 1963»7nter 

Gärtner. Mi tttlachul-« l«nl)3rg,aort3all53tJ 7riiv^t3tu^ 
aUn (Mathe aati&,I>h5'85.k^Philo:äOi)hle)*Dr*Dlas* 1912 
"'iitsr Apriorlar^na dos T^auni«» b^l Kant und file Frag« dtw 
des tTrsprunga des räu^Bliohen Oheray.tera der Vor- 
8l;0lluag8n"*-Qyim.löhrer Lembergffiir Uath^Phya^, 
dann auah PfillJ Sohuljahr 1913/14 In Oö^hiört 
Piiil* böi Hdsiuttd !lTiö3erl und Mtjthem. bei -David Hll- 
bort« -Milltüxdiensti öaterr •-itrtl, Fo^nt^Auaseloh- 
uuug ;0rcaa6 ailb^rae 2upforieitamadp.ili6. In poltt# 
A^Biöö Uuuptjßami dtr Artiliorie .(1920) ^ 1921 Dojsent 
UulT^We -Htibil^doUr* 'V'Vua dor :**0thcdoloeio dor de- 
duktireii ^Ucsdnäoliafiön " (poln# publ. Louiberg 
1920 (vor dotiert 19£;l))a922 DOi$ont';:iiT#L^n:bcrg -md 
Grsntn»leiür«i»19£6 a#o#Prof, Utiir^We ,1927 tJnlTt 
Lemb6rg;dortBelb6t ordöut^Piof. 1934-39 t -194^-1954 
Prof» dtr Theorie und lIttho;^ol06l5 :er ^^l^.ftn* ^hsf- 
ttn au d«r Mathom^-natar^its« Pf.l:nltlt Uüir.roaen; 
Hektor dortttelbet 194a-52a95£ Prof. der Logik 
lJniT# Wa iLeiter Abt .für Logik ur.d Dire/itor- 
atcllvortr. dG0 Inetitut;» für»J.oloeio 
a«r Foln. Ak. WW Wa<bia zum Tode);ala Univ. F/of, 
i. H» s«it I961.-Dr. h.o. Univ. Clerriont-Perrand» 
Begründer und Uerauageber "Studia Lojioa" (Wa-^6a0 
1953-1963 .(12 Bde)(auch engl. ,fraj 



A. gtJhört zur aoelytl5oh.ioglPtieohfln LembKrg- 
Wareohau«, johiUe d.r Phlloeopl« m Polen,d«r«n 
Begrüßu« Efcüimisrz Tw^doweiti »«in Lehrer an der 
ürxir. L«inbere t^s» znmzrrm mit Jan Lukosiewioa, 
Äe.. aoäöpfer der LoglBtlic m Polrn. a. wldnet/aioh 
Uftupfeßäciilioh den studli:..a Cer Jiethodologie aer ae- 
dttkfclvea 571esciiaohaften imd winftt.« rIb erster In 
Poleu mxter den l^ufines von B.rtr.nÄ Hur sc 11, c out 4^» 
rat una D.HlUert die -..athcm. IrelTc nuf die PraseK 
äer achliiaBfolgcrims-dcr coin erster Auf«nta 1915 

^^^ -'beCTlff' "^""^' 'ier .Definition «ad dc»#isl. 
8teus7rr^erpormi'.lwl^8eDi.oliaf1;en,an,In dloaon 
h£.t der v/dirh«U8l)ejjrlff dar K&tar-)rla8oa8Ch?ften 
kair.« nelevanz.da .58 reluc Co da^jk.nd inge behwidaln, 
DW. -lUer:er rrsis" brachte Ihn r.^lne ?heorl* d« 
/«diiÄlen rccireatloasllsrma nnhP -eine,.T?irr«itnynnff 
äcBiC'uiten von Hcr.rl Polcoar^M^eP .«r 1930-36 treu 
bilcb.ifca aufolfje gibt ^n of.^etv.,,^f.9cM.OHS«ne tmd 
tounoxo atro.chon,welob ..,-»1 letat^r« em, f.efc, u«. 
üb«u«tzbax-e ,«t'oUbilder" ora^raßende B-^iffsanp^, 
ratur auiv/claiu.Iu lürei 'atrnitux b38t«hen tmr«- 
»üokbar*, axioottUü^iktive uid .?apirls3h« 
31imr.g,iu {••Diroktlvon"),die Jedor ,a«r aie Spra- 
ohe Terataht .akaeptierea muss,!i.B„ daa Viereck hnt 
vior aoitan.ln dar Naohkrlogszeite wurd« a, von Kar- m/ 

xlBtlBOh« Seite r..B. Adam 3oteff) wegen der ^t?l-.t^;":äW 



Ä. ^^hÖT% zur aaeXytlsch-loglPtiecbon Lombi-rg- 
Waxcchau., iohuU e«r Phlloe.opie m Polen,ä«r.a 
Begr-ünü« Ewiaderz Tw^do^aici eam i^ehrw mi der 
üulT. Leiuberg wsr zuae-rnn nlt Jan Itücaslcwioa , 
de., aohöpfer der Loglotlk m PoX.n. a. widmete 'sioh 
tiRUptßi.clillch den Studiiziu fer Kfithodoloele der de- 
dtikfciveD wiEscnachaften und wandte «18 erster in 
Poleu mur den ITlunties ron B.rtr.T,d,Coutt4^ 
rat und D.Hilbert dlo r^sthcn. loffll: nuf die Prägen" 
ä«r aohltisefclgcruns-S.r com orater Aufanta 1913 

^""^-'beCTlff'^""'^' '«' Definition und de» #5^1- 
stfua^:.^ uen Porwelwl43eDaoI.afi;en,aa.Ia älcaon 
hufc dur WduhöifeebeöTiff dar »atar-irtaeonaoh^ften 
keiue r?elevaia,da e5e reine Codo.::v.ndinffe b^hwjdeln. 
D*n --1-ner Zrels" brechte Ihn f.«lne Theorie de« 
^^«divalen r-ocTeatloialU-.W nnhc -fiine,v.5rr.eit«rnrff 
äc»jenitea roa Henri Polnccrf^^etn -r 1930-36 treu 
blieb. itaa aufole;e cibt 9b ofrfkm\:^sGhlo^z^n9 und 
l:om.oxo airocbon,»/öXob g.r«l letztWa elo^ f,ete ua- 
überootaboro ,-t/oUbiIdcr" era^ugeudo Besriffearpa^ 
ratur auiwclam.Iu liuei 'atrttätax beetthen tm^er- 
»Uokbar«, asiOQatiaobe.deduktlTc iiad caplrlsohe 
aimir.geiu (••Dlrokliivnn- ),dle jcd«r .«er die Spra- 
oh« versteht .alueptieren muse.a^B,, das Viereck hat 
Tier aeiten.In der Naohkrlogaaeife wurde a, von Kar- 


xlatlBOhe« Seite fz.B. Adan Schaff) wegen der ^tt&lX^)^ 



Neubearbeitung der Enciclopedia Filosofica 

herausgegeben von den Professoren Walter Brugger, Hans-Georg Gadamer, 

Romano Guardini, Helmut Kuhn, Helmuth Plessner 

Schriftleitung: Professor Dr. Walter Brugger 


Artikel 1 

Zwischen Herrn/f4föXi?Pts&jM^ Prof . Dr . Max R i e s e r 
und den Herausgebern des LEXIKONS DER PHILOSOPHIE, 
vertreten durch die Schriftleitung, wird die im folgenden näher bezeichnete 
Vereinbarung getroffen: 

Artikel 2 

Herr/föiäJö^RfläijdKl» Pror... D.r,, , Max R i e s e r 

^SClfxlk>d3earbeitet für das LEXIKON DER PHILOSOPHIE 
den^Sdfe Artikel 

.l.Q5l7.....AJ..d.Uklewl.c.Z.. mit 6.7. Zeilen* zum 31....1.......1.967...** 

mit Zeilen zum 

mit Zeilen zum 

mit Zeilen zum 

mit Zeilen zum 

Artikel 3 

Die Herausgeber erwerben, wie bei lexikalischen Werken üblich, alle Verlags- 
und Verwertungsrechte einschließlich der Übersetzungsrechte der ange- 
nommenen Beiträge für alle Auflagen und Ausgaben und werden ermächtigt, 
diese Rechte an Dritte zu übertragen. 

Artikel 4 

Die Artikel werden nach den Richtlinien der Schriftleitung, die Bestandteil 
dieses Vertrages sind, bearbeitet. Beiträge, die der Grundhaltung des Werkes 
und den Richtlinien nicht entsprechen, können dem Verfasser zurück- 
gegeben werden. 

Artikel 5 

Neugeschriebene Beiträge werden mit dem Namen des Verfassers gezeichnet. 
Für bearbeitete Beiträge gelten die Bestimmungen der Richtlinien. Die 
Schriftleitung ist berechtigt, die Beiträge im Interesse der Einheitlichkeit 
des Werkes redaktionell zu überarbeiten und sie auf die in Artikel 2 angege- 
benen Ansätze zu kürzen. Sofern dadurch der Text wesentlich verändert 
wird, ist die Genehmigung des Verfassers einzuholen. Wird diese verweigert, 
so kann der Beitrag nicht erscheinen. 

• Die Normalzeilc berechnet sich mit 48 Buchstaben einschließlich Wurtzwischenräumea 
•• Termine für die Ablieferung des satzfertigen Manuskripts 

Artikel 6 

Die Urheberrechte des Verfassers können gegenüber Dritten vom Verfasser, 
von den Herausgebern und vom veröffentlichenden Verlag in gleicher Weise 
geltend gemacht werden. Der Verfasser verpflichtet sich, seine Beiträge in 
der auf dieses Lexikon bezogenen Form nicht an einen anderen Verlag zu 

Artikel 7 

Der Verfasser verpflichtet sich, die in Artikel 2 für die Ablieferung der Bei- 
träge genannten Termine einzuhalten. Andernfalls ist die Schriftleitung 
berechtigt, auf den Artikel zu verzichten und bei verspäteter Ablieferung 
die Annahme zu verweigern. 

Artikel 8 

Der Verfasser liest auf Verlangen der Schriftleitung eine Korrektur seiner 
Beiträge ohne besondere Vergütung. 

Artikel 9 

Die Herausgeber vergüten dem Verfasser ein Honorar von DM 0,20 pro 
Normalzeile des LEXIKONS DER PHILOSOPHIE (48 An- 
schläge) für die angenommene, inhaltlich relevante Bearbeitung schon vor- 
handenen (deutschen oder italienischen) Textes; bzw. DM 0,30 für Verifi- 
zierungen, Korrekturen und Hinzufügungen der Bibliographie; bzw. ein 
Honorar von DM 0,50 für Neutext. Damit sind sämtliche Ansprüche des 
Verfassers, die sich aus der Übertragung der Rechte laut Artikel 3 ergeben, 
ein für allemal abgegolten. Abrechnung und Auszahlung des Honorars 
erfolgt spätestens vier Wochen nach Annahme des Beitrags. 
Für die Auszahlung des Honorars an Ausländer gelten die jeweils gültigen 
devisenrechtlichen Bestimmungen. 

Artikel 10 

Der Verfasser ist berechtigt, ein Exemplar des Gesamtwerkes vom Verlag 
mit einem Nachlaß von 40 % vom Ladenpreis zu beziehen. 

Artikel 11 

Der Verfasser verpflichtet sich, die aufgrund seines Mitarbeiterverhältnisses 
erhaltenen Informationen nicht an Dritte weiterzugeben. 

Dieser Vertrag wurde dreifach ausgefertigt und beiderseits unterzeichnet. 


(Unterschrift des A.utors)i 


München , den2.8 ,.] o . 1. 

Lexikon dar Philosophie (untcrschrihact schriwcitung) 

8023 Pullach - Postfach »• A. der UeseüSCf.c'l f T d:3 [ ?r3KSgabo 

lolef on 79 20 81 ^^ lexikons der Phüosoplile e.V. 



tilittm^"^ vorgeworfen, v^i,s or rlt der LtJclIiruiiß ab 
whoxte-jdat^a cir 41c? Th'jorlo Afir ££:Bchlcßf euer iind 
kca3:iejcf^n Sprncher^ seife 1036 ntifgtet'lien iiatte imd 
ela "napUrene Pil ticn'* fci^ zeichne to^rat^Hchlioh 
wl^t fx t^en Ic' c^n-rj» roii Eenr/Iej lu;^. Blcl:rrt 
atrf G^rtii?,4 eeirier seai^mtlsoh'^n Spraohthecrlc zu- 

olmi» oxlorratisaiio uafi dcäuütive ilnnrcgslxi 2U# SC 

Inferena rjnd d«r Thöcrl« a^r 01uoi:Süpiil^(J^ Tön 

nenxaeimi^ A»3hincrgr^GJicmc2iy ) au Lioiiiblaior^a* Hr 

\vt;r d#r vvioiitiGcte Orcanlaatcr der Jtudieu der Lo- 

gix In ?ol4n der Öuobtricgaaieit^Lie ^etriOdoiCfc;ie 

der Wlaec/uacüaitfti* bi^v-c^iohiiölo er a^j-oii £jl1ö "präg- 

metl.>cUc ^ogÜL^'oina d^ixen iet^t« iia^ide^lÄe als 

*:^dtÄiBlfcft<?t:£:c';aftyieiz:£a oxiainellsitea Beitrag tix 

Phllu Sophia |;;i3 er eich*, ''ßbsclüaffer.'' ^ioaderri '^rer- 

wi£ööncohf.ftllchen'' wollte, bildet ^eiue Theorie 

vofli EpriorlEOfcor. iiXkftLntriiaeii^envVort der Sprache« 

AU3G«: Jesji. 1 poz)u4aaie,2Sd5,\''elSSü a.1365 
(apraoht und Jrkeuntril^ ;»ciiriftenaaöviahl ,Bd I 
13E0-.1W9, M.ll lj^4ü-i;;^63,(poaWiaai. 

Loglka pj;ugfliat;/o«riii (Iragiiia^l^che jjo^tü) llrag^ 

Ton HtMortiBidX cuid K^Ssanlawakl, Wci 19dä(po&thua) 

Zerj^a Loglici« Um 19SZ (dt^Uebera» Abrlaa der Logik 

Bin 1958 

New York , 29.9.66 

Herrn . . 

p. Bader .wiss.AssiaU. 
Lexikon der Philosophie 
8 Münohen-Soim 
Sohneokstrasae 17 

Sehr geehrter Herr Bader, 

ich erhielt Ihr Schreiben von 
4. TQc^ nr,fi Hie mit Luftpost übermittelten gedruckten 
August 1966 und ^^^ ^^J^JJ^f ^^^j. Kazimierz A d d u k i e w i c 
Beilagen ^^etr .einen Artikel uoer^» ^^^^ ^^^ Bearbeitung 

finerlr??kelfS:*^l^?Si^^^?I£^ . 

I rtzt,raÄ^ntr^It:;rechender Zei^ 


die festzusetzende Länge 

f uX Ivlit freuadliohen iümpfehlungen 


Max Ries er 



äl€ Itokehrböxkelt ö.ex iohlussfolgerung) in : 
"Prztglad Pil020fiosny"^I(191») o3 287«297 
Spraoho und Sinn in: Erkenn t;nia IF(lö34) 33 100-138 
i>a» Weltbild und die Begriff»apparatur in: srkennt. 
nis I¥-3^ E59-8Ö7*-. iiie wiesensohaftliohe Welt- 
perapejctive in JÄrkennünle V (1936) ää 22-30 
engl, lue doientifio world-jeerapeotire in "Head- 
iag» in Päiloa, Analj^öia ,HX 1949 )• - jDer logiati- 
dohe Autllrrationaliaiima in Polen in: btkenntnia T 
33 161-161 • Logik und empiriaohe WisMnsohaft in 
larkenntnis 7 ^3.162. 31nnrogeln, Weltperspektire, 
Welt in: Brkenntnis V» 33 165-1S8. Die syntakti- 
sche Konnexität (dt) in : Studla Phllog^fPol.) I 
(1936 )*3a 1-27. Die Definition, in :Aotea du Jon- 
gre« International de Philosophie Sclentifi^iue , 
Paria 1936, Tome V, 33 1-7 • (dt.) - \Jeb9T die An- 
wendbarkeit der Logik auf philoa. Probleme in : 
Actes du VIII Congrca International de Philosophie 
a Prague (1936) 33 170-174. ( dt ).^Methodology and 
Metasoienoe inrSyntiieee VIX, 3, (1848/49, 3. 244 

Äpi5t6£coloßy and 3emlotioa iniProoeeainga of tha 

JC Oongreaa of Philo eophy, Aaste rdam\ 33 607-609 


21. 5 

lcp,lo cxA ii^xparienoa iu Sjut^oöo 7111(1950- 
1951) B320P-?004-.Cr tbe Ho^^ion of }]?:«lnton- 
0(5 in 3ti2if,"1ilIC5 JJ»o1J lY (?03Pn 19S1) 

al Impllcatlon In: 3t'?aia logloa IVflßSS) 

HhTfff^ Ooncaptß c:f Doflnltlou in: T.Ofi'i'me 
($t Anal^ßO 3-4fl958) 3a 115-126.- ^ ncthofl 
elf •llralnß^ln,?? Int^^nalctial fsentcnoe.^ rM 
»i?r»ti»nt.l«l fo?r>nlno In: Aoten *n ZII In- 
te riiatlCTiiil Oon^Ti^B ^n ^»inofophl^? , fl?5Q) 

fondsmÄat a<^» pynpcaltslon« itnrtlytliiTi^B in 
atndla loe:lca ?III(]19S8) 3? S59-'2ai*- 
La aotlon d? retlonalltr? ötje ^Äthodcje 

d»infcrenoe fsdlllblea in. : Lcfl^ntf» et 

Analyst C fl?5B) 33 2-18 

logical rolut of 7167/ i-a: 3ta.*lE lC£^loa 
12 fl96D) 33 S^'J-aS^' ♦ i^cml-r fU^b-r i-^s 
MtSBdn) poln» In 3tidln Icglos nfl9cl) 
33 223-231 •• Oa thü Freedor^ of 3'^Uooe- 

09$ II l-2fl957) 33 1-19. T!ie Ito'^lai:. of 
?oandatlon lii:5h«» pr^bl^tn of fou'idatiioa 
Wa 1961- 33 1-11 



von A* In 3t:ndln 10^5 o?a :m (19 ^^ö ) 3:i 39- 

«off.CTT!-! • l(4rO) 19G5 ^3 17-20 ,f*irn^r In: 
»•Hnoh fllo»ofiann,7**Vol* «II, Hr* 2-4 
1964 8f^ 119-lM,- 
TfXr^ajalaw Sf^tnrJri^wJ.oa- HlnLorla fllosofU 

Kfx 1938- BfUIII ,33 g03-f)09. 

111,2 fl252} 33 120-131 • (T.iaenc.i ^.^iOzo^xn^S 

SZII^-?*J!-1 , 33 115-113 (mit Bild); 

vloTsr. a-. tl« i^c^ pocla^lo-' fil05cr.c25n:^oh- 

Philosoph, '.n^ohntptngt'n^ ir:*?Huoh fllCK«'" 

nasl^d^rs AJrUCdu-^icr (lö9C-19^5) In: 
ntuftla Icc^lcr. 771,33 7-?!9 und ^m.!!^ 
SS 7-r.9.- R^5.5i.5r^'.lLl- ^YcM^rr»'^.- 
t;'i& Inövüio;! vi prcüaoh 1 dsltlrJLncaol 
Kcialßdcr;.! A^fi-Äl^v/luÄrv (Biau ?xobl.yia • rr 
La(?.nl:tioii in dca Arl;eifcox\ und in der T'lrk- 
ßuniicit; rou A» ) lu 3iiudia logica aVI, 
9S 31-33 


Blatt 7 

Maria Kokoas^^naka« niektorsroh osiag*» 
nlaolaoh Easlmiersa Äjduklewloza w aakre- 
aie Xoglkt , matodologli muk 1 fllozofll 
(Uebor einige laiatimgen A^«a aaf dem Ge- 
biete der Logik, der Eethodologie der 

Wlaaenaohaften und der Phlloaophlo) in; 

"Studia fllozoflosne'',lf40) 1963, 335-16. 

American Association 

for the Advancement oj Science 



DUpont 7-7171 

May 7, 1958 


Dear Fellow Scientist: 

At intervals of several years, the American Association for the 
Advancement of Science enjoys the opportunity to write each member 
of the professional societies affiliated with the AAAS. It was a 
pleasure to welcome the American Philosophical Association as an 
affiliate in December 1936 and to follow your activities since. 

All aspects of philosophy have been of major interest to 
the Association since its own founding, and this is frequently re- 
flected in the programs of the annual meetings and in AAAS publica- 
tions, The Association's December 26-31, 1958, meeting will be in 
Washington« The programs of Section L and related societies will be 
of particular interest to you and we hope that many of you will find 
it possible to attend. 

Those who read SCIENCE regularly have noted that it is indis- 
pensable for keeping up with developments in all scientific fields 
and with general events of concern to all scientists. The new en- 
larged SCIENCE, with the content of the former SCIENTIFIC MONTHLY 
combined with it, is included with the annual dues of $8.50. 

Many of you are already members of the AAAS, If, however, you 
are not, your President, Max H. Fisch, Sponsors you and we cordially 
invite you to join the Association and lend your support to the 
one large Organization that represents, and works for, all science. 
I hope that you will find the enclosed leaflet of interest and that 
it will prompt you to fill out and retum the application on the 
last page, 


Raymond L. Taylor 

Associate Administrative Secretary 



'/^^ VOl 





T V 


Absolute and relative propertlea iJ^f^ 

To be a "aon" or a ''mother" are relative (relational) prajertiea 

differing ftom "belng greater than"^ being older than" or "be similar 


to".There are ^'relationahipa" and "relative (relational) proper ties 

dependent on real procesaes between two individuala .Thus the queation 

of "relative propertiea ia linj^ed with the queation of the eaaenoe 

of X relationa and the ontio oonnectiona between objecta« 

It is the oo-exiatence of a multiplicitj of individual objeota 

that generatea relationshlpa between xzobjeota and the faot of the 

exiatenoe of aooalled relative propertiea^There ia no doubt that 

relationa "hatween objeota. oonatituting diaorete wholea are poaaible. 

Thia baaio faot ahould be kept in mindyit ahowa that the theoriea 

^ffirming that no individual objeot haa any property which would 

be "abaolate'V muat be falae» The mere faot of exiatenoe of objeota 

differing arnong 0a^ijjmjiAJm^ w Mc ^ i<«ya auffioient oondition of 

relationahipa between them ahc« that they muat iBave aome oharaoter- 

iatica "proper" to them ,aome propertiea vihli^h ^ hey haf e regardleaa 

of the exiatenoe of aome other/ objeota^ Without auoh propertiea 

theae objeota /0OBld a i t 9 ti4 g * (^ancL aa ä reault there could be no 

relationahipa 40tw««n erHL»ii/^4l9ij»o4Mt 9(fBS j;herefore there oould -^ ^V^^.^" 

relative propertiea in a fwr^&we^j/aenae of thia term* A theory 


of relative and abaolute propertiea muat therefore inolude "abaolute" 
propertiea «The problem of the differenoe betv/een abaolute and relative 
propertiea ia eapeoially atociagvft* whejfw the individual objeota are 

not iaolated and immutable. Her e it ia atill more diffioult to ^r^ J»oi^ 
to the oaaea of abaolute propertiea and to define them» 

The firat group of "relative propertiea" are auoh aa "similar 
to" , "different from" ," amaller than" , " internal" ^external" "lower" 

"Upper" "later" "earlier". 

But we also aay that fluida have no own form and that they 

(W^^j.^jWpyjw^l'*" ■ -«riH^idge^^and tranalated from the Poliah original 

"«y i'iax 




aoaulre the form of their »«rroT»44»e« . l^aybe that it is in a 

ainiilar senae that we saj that "o clor" is relative .O^hia may mean 
th'atjjolor. depend^ on -Uw^ight, 

We also oonsider^aa "relative" jensuous jr opertiea) wfaare there 
ia a queation of a psyohophj/aioal relationahip between the 
objeota atid onraelvea.It is said that oolora.amella.amoothneaa, 

r(^neaa,taata8 are "relative propertiea" ^ 

Vk t4"r>>vöttra*.^ ^IhÄ^«t;fai^^a "good oonductibilits" 

*»-«tgaiae* «wh propertiea HTT«trrinfgiairTy«y aa goua 

Of metals or the proper "ahape" of^olida would aeem^äS=S3. "ab- 
solute " .However.thes too are waaidaraÄ » "relative siace the 
shape of solids depends on the pressure to whioh thej^ are subjeoted. 
^.'iLÄ/a bodj^'if a «^ heat conduotor dependa also on 
temperatura^eto. These are undoubtedly "propertiea" of bodies 
but they are mutable and depend on external influenoea.Theyefore 

they M?e jiaaaidw»d «» "relative." 

sensuoua propertiea 

Another t3?pe of "relativity" is constituted bj 
Of ob.jeota v;hich really do not belong to them -.furthermore^^gs^ 
are'^i^a*»«^ relative . 4IuiU Jux luüüuuo a <. h > " ^ ^^°^ itpo^sider 
ed ^ valuable or valueleas^h^gg^it_^idj^ot^;^2^ prop«rtiea 

at all .Bat pthera maintai^fe^"'ab30lute" oharacter; 
_agftia»4^-.the relartlTlsta who dony it. 

Another type of "relativity " of valuea ia ^tffoi»ed by those 
tjho say that valuea are alwaya relative "^t^^^^^J^^^J^^H;;/- 
value a for somebody or for something. A«««r*tTir Uö iH^ ^ ^^^'^S 
cannot be valuable "by itaelfl'A value would then be"relative" 
even if no ohangea of valuation irerTW ooour, 

Hxßl^tiv4*s«^ «ett*i<medrmbove.In aome cases it is thought that 
the "relatiye" property 4«* not^ssUl ^elcng to the ^"^^^^^ 
questionjo^'apparently so or that the property ia 


aome external faota outaide ♦# the objeot in queatlon. 

^dependa on exterior faotors .a property might be relative alao if it ia 
a resultant of the oo-exiatenoe of two different objecta and of the re- 
lationahip be.tween themjA™-., 

Another inatanee of relativity may be the effeot of the type of the 
qualitative or mterial make-up of the property .This make-up may be auoh aa 
to refer to aome relationahip with other objeota. S-inally the "mode of 
being" of the relative property may be aimilar to or different from other 
propertiea of the sane object. 

'^vnal rlfirifli 

exclude from our 

M inauiry into relative aad abaolute propertiea all morely apparent 
propertiea. If the epistenologioal relativista were for inatanee right in 
m-intaining that aenaupuaC secondary« ) (lualitiea are only phantoma cauaed 
by aome agenta,thoae ciualitiea should bo exoluded.If the relativista in 
mattera of value are right, valuea ahould alao be e-cluded. 

nfh all the other caaea the difference between the relative and ab- 
aolute propertiea ahould atill lie within the boundarlea of a given individual 
objeot .But I shall not uae the term" property for "relative propertiea". 
But thia ia merely a queation of teroiMlogy ^^tfj*. 

We muat rejeot firat of all the traditional dichotor^y of "relative" 
and "abaolute" propertiea and form a new diviaion of olaaaea of property 
v;here "relative" propertiea would form only one olaaa among several. 

The old divlsionjvaa in faot ambiguoua. I shall distiug**efer 

ae author uBes4nste-d of the term "relative proper 

Ü ) Tjropertles ^lendent on external o 

!:! f°rjS"tlr?!roäug unoonditionaH. to an individual o.Jeot 

we ahall(have to'mlceTlI^l another distinotion between "eaaential" 
aud "non-eaaeutial" pro^ertlea of an object .*^Thi3 distinotion 
should not ba confuded with the diatinctiona mentioned aboye. 
4 BelatiYe_^EI£££ities(olxaraoteriatica).We met them alx«Ää».ab ove 
^aa the firat group of properties expressing a relationahip 
(eiternal ,intemal.left.*igiit ato.) *^ C^^^^^^^« P^°^^"*^ 
ms belong to an object P but it dependa on aome relationaHip K 
of * P tp aome P« and indireotlj, of some propertiea of both P and 
P. which are Ate baaia of the relationahip (fundamentum relationis). 

change/ in P itaelf . 

such a relative propertj m:3 oharaoterize the objeot P^l»«rnot 
direot^:fy^SrSl.***«^^ B.Such a propert, maj 

"inhere" in P bat it ia derivative A;ii|f reapect to R and ?' and haa 
ita ontio foundation outaide of P.If R would ^^eaae.the relative 
propertj would diaappear^although not hing 

This n>eana that the natural S^i*««^«^ ^ .^^^i^uld not be auffi- 
oient aa a foundation of the relative property in queation. 

If something ia''amaller thaii",thi3 relational faot ia not 
a quality within thJneaning of sensuoua qualitiea auch aa red or 
amoothjit doea not introduce aftj.*h±HÄ new ontio material .nothing 
real inoarnate in P. One could thinld that auch relative propertiea 
are purelyJLntentional^oreationa and that aa a reault their content 
is uot n^teriall^ inoarnate in t^^^obJe^P. It doea not seem to 
.. ..». ,MA. ia correot.lWW«pM«i,rS^?^"fe^tie3 aa "aimilar to" , 


Mifferent from" ."upper" ^wer" ^maj be» erected on the baaia 
of "real" propertiea but^notposaeaa t^e mineaa of reality. 
Hevertheleaa "the relational «»- m^^ ' ^^r^^* of the relative 
^opertj ÄilÄiiS.)thr"araoter of a real propert^ becauaa 

»3 appearano. ^. .ntail ^»^« ?|r|S^ '" ^'''^°°' '° '""'""' 

^ 4 1-« thP isft of the other whioh is to the right 

Of the flrst 0«. If thesa oMects are In *— c»;^.!- oharacteri.a- 
uon "left - and "rlght" «™«^ i-olvss no Material oonae^a.n- 
oes .ut IS » — r i.opart,^r<l ilar" or Misairallar-.But IJ 

.i.9 ^t 

theaa ob^eots *^,i:^ gravitatioual fleld,then -laft" or -right" 

^nas aoduire the character of / real propertiAlince hare it is 
not indifferent wh^her the objeot is on the right or on the left 
side. A different spatial arrangement of the atoms in a mole^| 
of sugar ma^; alBo affeot the optical aualities of the augar 
then caaae .eing a relative property and heoo..e a. propartj belonging 
tmoonditionally to the sabstanoe in aueation. 

The speoifio character of the relative propertj haa 
epistemolosioal conse.uencea.It cannot he porceiv^d (especially ^^ 
obaerved) b, the eeusea bat it muat he underatood in reapect 
to R and P« v-hen we aee P. The diacovery and identification of the 
relative propert, ia a oonplex oognitional activit, which differa 
distinctlj from the aimple obaervation of things in certain (other) 

types of propertyi ' .^ 

Form and relational fanction^g^ of the relative property 

Show that it ia an effect of the Äiatence of P.P' and R and a 
reaultant of theae three faotors.^It is therefore derivative 
and different froo othar t.pea of propert.^is to aome degree 


JSitained vvithin P bj aomething external to it. 


It waa thought therefore that whenever a propertj ia dependent 
on something external .we have to do ipao facto .ith a relative 
property. But thia ia not true? ^i ^ ^°™ talce^ropertiea whioh 
are dependent on aomething axternal.set^^ot relative propertiea 

in the aenae aentioned above, 

Propertlea dapendent on eWternal ooncLltioiia ( faotora) 

I have in mlnd suoh propertiea aa the "ahape" of water in a oup 

or -sä the ahape asaumed bj a ga« in a oertain container^ or to take 

a more oomplex example, the ahape of a ailk balloon filled with 

/ c|.uantit5 

gaf . The ahape of the balloon dependa on the iH^rMXB* kmmx± of 
gat yoontained in it ,the degree of tenaion of the ailk wrap^eto. 
B^The -«« Of »otlon Of a traln depends not onl, on tho l.^.t^^r 
but on the ahape and direotion of the raila to which it muat 
.^*<^*'^*f'?^''^-/^-'&^:Vhat all auch propertiea ^Ä^^t.^ 

muat be apatial.Thia is not^o :thus »«rtrAshemioal 
oombinationa need a oatalyat pTbu i^vm^ \^n other worda the forma- 
tion of thia new property ia dependent on the exiatance of some 


«■nmgvtrtn^irgt/ 1 3CktKk 30me 

elementw extraneoua to the oombination, 
^ there ia 

In all theae caaea ««xkaxs/a property 

objeot T Vtt t— fc * « A*4t-' ^ ^ 4..^ ,„ 

tk^a±siHÄaxiiÄtx±± -*»/W±TBt*T8 — i-r»-. dependent on some ontio re- 

lation between ±lc«/object P and aome other objeot P» .Thia deriva- 
tive a^ality relatea both to the geneaia of the property in (jueation 
and to ita continuing existenoe.Ihe derivative quality ia of caua^al 
oharaotar beoauee the exiatenoe of thia property ia an effeot of 
a conneotion between thia objeot and other objeota.Thua for inatanoe 
the ahape of the watar adJuatÄ itaelf to the ahape of the oup. 
Without the latter the water oould neither •o^iU'WB nor retain thia 
ahape .The ahape of the water ia a reault of the Cooperation of 
oertain propertiea of the water and of orw-feÄtft-ri'BlJn^rrtH of other 
objeots with whioh the water oomes into oontaot* The latter ia the ^^dd. 
nto»4% of the ontio conneotion "between the oup and the v/ater.If the 
oontaot betweeu them oea3ea,the water ^isksAÜL los^ its ahape.One of 
the main differenaas between relative propertiea and those that 

are externally 

ooHaiöta in the fact that while in the 

oase of the former the mere existance of the w^twg** tarras of the 
relatipn ia suffioient rOTESut an^ ontio act^iti» between them, SudC 



indiapenaable in the oaae^properties due to 
external oonditiona. In the one oaae the propertj reaults from 
the relation as suchthere they must be oreated bj aome aotion or 
reaction of external factora. Bat th€^roper1^/A»(^calls more 
powerful than the relative ^W«*4<«.i* «» «W-a* Ä(r^l proper- 
tiea of the object. l*i4«/faot onlj 1iJ8»iUiect_,of some cause but 
mas be itoelipdie oauae (or at leaat «j^-weTtfir causal faotora) of 
some real effeota. Thua the shape of the surface of the water ia 

^j»«U4^the refleotion would also Mange^. The substance of the 
property dependent on external oonditiona ia.however, not baaed on 




any relational funotion whioh would 

aome other objeot. 

Such property oannot be «underatood« in tte^^^« "»5 »a a relational 
properts fupper .lower ,left and right,eto. ^Itia trae that on the 
whole it is adapted to aome external oonditiona. 

he oonvex 

\AJV^ Tit»t4(poa i t ive^ 

ipe of the of the water in the oup correaponda 

"•- V' y balloon 

the latter' a/negatiTe)conoave|Sahape. Xhe form of a/partiallj? fillec 

ia3äLsaai with ga^ is a reaultant of other apatial and material pro- 


pertiea of the balloon it seif and of ^rfre external oonditiona/ 
whA«i»^h« -balltjon ^ä^J^^^lt ia a "reaultant" i.e. a oertain 
properts of )^»e*4a« ?Mit*> charaoter reauitmg from two seta of 
oonditiona. But this is not a coordination 9^^^ ^. ^^aX'' ^^ 
aaw in oorrelative relational propertiea: *dM«(^greater than" 
correaponda \iJ^JtP^i9AiL--«tflA3tog to a property "amaller than". 
In the oaae of propertiea dependent on outaide factora the adapta- 

tion is only a faotual one, 

Aoquired propertiea The ao^uired propertiea of real obj»*»s are 

§omewhat akin to propertiea dependent on external facto ra.They too 


ij? an external faotor but onoe trhny g-cj 

roreated they skaEXajoctKXtxs bei eng) to their objeot even if the 

external faötor v^hioh ore>^ated the^m^ceased to exist. Therefore 

they cannot exist In ideal entitiaa whioh oannot have -rrngnc th^mm 

«ürv'WB mutual oausal conneotions« If a aolptor *^?n1 d oonfer a o^ertain 

shape on a pieqe of marble,he must develop ocrtain aotivitiea#!rheir 

reault w 4ill l i^/bhe form of the marble .This w e ml a -h^ an acijuired 

property of the marble. The propertiea of a broth as different 

^ ^, oJto^ although 

from the propertiea of ita oomponent parta are<^quired.But/aoq.uired 

propertiea may be/due to outside faotora f n a in t h n r ^ n n ^w , liim. 6 oi!! > 

,the latter are only 

neoeaaary, *o 

it« Onoe (marble ^^ga^ aoctuired ita shape, the latter 

not isxjsxtez to preaerve 



regardleaa of the aotivitiea to whioh this shape ±a/due. Purther 

aotivitiea oould only ohange that shape. Thia is ao beoause the 

link between an acquired propertjax and the other propertiea of 

a given objeot ia muoh-flaacja oloaä Lhan/between an externally 

/ the ß 

oonditioned proper ty and ±ta/remaining propertiea of ita aubjeot 

This ia espeoially true if we)rOa3rwith solide :their moleoular 

mtitual thei^- 

atruoture and the/arrangement of/moleoulea in spaoe^ and the forcea 

aotive xtkktxxidu among the moleoulea would resri3t/TrfEei^"BottIea 

trying to atattee their ''proper" ^ahape.Of oourae only to a certain 

degree.This "proper'^ ahape *üffoughly «Mäate»g^ fdur ing a certain 

period of time v/ithin some limita dependent for inatanoe 


the temperature of thia body and the jgjiiJitkM^ temperattLre^^^^fiaVY^Hc/H^'/iA^ 

It must not,hov;ever ,be "sustained" by outside 

bodiea aa the form of the water in a oup,There are acquired propertiea 

of tarying 4«^etWrv»R^3ome are more other less resiatant to exterior 

are / ly , ^^ 

preasure,3ome xzs kaxx x tightcc KjsxxjEjdübaB othera jixmorE loosely 

connected v/ith the remaining propertiea of the objeot. All auch 
"lawa" are being discovered by the natural aciencea. 

We see in the firat place that aauired propertiea are of a differant 
kind than oorrelative relational prppertiea.They n^y be "underatood" 
while propertiea originating within an objeot due to external influenoea 
must be eopirically diaoovered or e.en e.peri entall, tested.We .ust 
aee would happen if the object would undergo a ohange of external 
oonditiona :whether the latter would perhapa oreate lin that objeot 

^Jw_propertiea.But o.r fao-* O baaio her^'».^ ;,e faot that thia 

objeot is in a poaition to react to any external aotion.lhia showa 
-«««y that it muat already posaeaa ao.e atable propertiea of ita Qwn 
How oould it otherwiae -reapond" to the actione It ^ .,owa alao thlt 
having acquired thoae propertiea aa a reaalt cf external action,it ia 
able to iceep them^although the aotion of the external faotora oeaaed. 
Theae new propertiea are not only kept in being by tir..^»»^w^ ^ther 
propertiea of the ob.ect but reveal the.aelvea „ relatively independent 
Of external faotora. "Ralatively-independentHmeana independent of aome 
but/of all exterior^influenoea and propertiea of exterior objeota. 
The linata of thia/independenoe have to be diauovered by the e.pirioal 
Boienoea. Thia independenoe provea that the a^red propertiea are 
truly the objecfa own propertiea an4 that they belong to ita ontio 
malce-up although they were f iglna'ted by exterior faotora.This differen 
tlatea auch propertiea from other apparent superfioial onea which an 
object may asaume aa one puta on a garment. 
The unoonditlonalfabaoi ate ) prop art^.« 

Theae propertiea belong to an objeot unoonditionally ; they owe nothing to 
external factora;tae latter aotivate neither their origin nor f.eir 
continuad exister.e..uch abaolute unconditional propertiea m« exhibit 
their oharacter in a more^adioal or in a more reatriotad form. Such 
propertiea in the radioal aenae oould only belong to ontioally prim- 
ordial individual obJeota.This would mean that auch objeota would have 
to be not only "eternal" but that they ahould have (at leaat in part) 


auch propertlea which are not even originated by an cxternal factor. 

Sfrte^would taift ^b«o««M. jlf we ..«^ri^auppoae^that auoh an object 

waa generated at a oertain time we would alaoKiilsanme that jrharg v. 

soma a-ir<-ai.««i -o 4. ^'^^^ ^'^^ indispenaable the orl^ln 

aome external faotora «-^ 3ufficient/conditior^''of JätoÜ/of this 

.-«^ i»*tq^S6KtJ«*-^at' bhe objeot waa^oreated out of nothing. 
Even in the moat favorable eventuality auch propertiea would have to 
be acquired at the moment when the objeot in queation oan^ into _ 
being. Aa it seema furthermore imposaible that fat leaat) two auch 
eternal objecta could exiat aimulaneoualy and create mutually aome or 
all of their propertiea by interaction,we muat oonolude that an object 
posseaaing absolute propertiea in a radical aenae would have to be 
itaelf onticall, primordial. In thia caae «^ ita absolute propertiea 
would oonatitute or at least belong to the ultin^te ontic n^l^e-up of 
all the objeota ontically derived from it and of.their aqquired or 
externally cauaed propertiea.I do not prejudge at thia time whether 
auch an object exiata in fac^but only auch an object could posaeaa 
absolute propertiea in a radioal aenae ;furthermoro it could exiat 
only if the baaia of ita being would be made up of a oertain .uantity 
of auoh propertiea. 

Apart from thia extreme oaae we oould think of another 
variety of abaolute proper tiea.namely of auoh propertiea in a more 
reatricted aenae . We would not have to aaaume that the aubject of auoh 
propertiea would have to be ontically primordial. But the propertiea 
in thia (reatricted) abaolute oaae would be linked with the queation 
Of eaaential propertiea or with the problem of the eaaence of an in- 
dividual Objeot. An abaolute property in thia aenae would have to exiat 
fr»m the atart of the exiatence of such an object; it would have 
to belong to it from this very moment on and it could not be dependent 
on any external factor; it would have to form at least a ,«xt«ttpartial 
ont^o foundation of all the other propertiea of that object i.e. 
Of the acquired onea.the externally dependent and of the relative 


ones (the relative oharaoteristioa)* 

3uch,a limitation of the meaning of "absolute" would perhaps 

the follovi/ing 
enable ua to inolude here iüöbi/partiou^sr oaae: the whole objaot was 

tM originated due to external faotora;all the proper tiea that form the 
ultimate oonatitutive baaia of the reat of ita propertiea or oharacteria- 
tioB were oreated at the aame time ;thua not even ita baaio propertiea 
would have to be absolute in the radiaal aense of the term. We assume 
of courae that auoh an objoot oan posaesa propertiea independent of 
or dependent on external factora only at the moment of ita be- 
ginning of existenoe: beoause obYioual;7 if it is to exist at all, 
it must already posseaa a certain natural Constitution« 

If it ia aupposed to posaeaa oertain abaolute propertiea 
(in the reatrioted form) ,then it oan posaeaa them only if they were 
poatulated by the verj nature of the objeot (1) either aa propertiea 
at onoe fullj^ developed and formed or (2) aa propertiea auppoaed 
to develop later on from a certain kernel« !Ehis alternative depends 
on whether the objeot in q^uestion originatea in ita füll strength or 
whether it developa gradually« ^ha subjeot matter of thoae propertiea 
•whether fully and partially developed---would have to be the necessary 
cLualitative aupplementation of the baaio nature of the objeot.Thia 
supplementation would not req.uire any other material addition out of the 
material of such an objeot exoept out of ita baaio nature or other 
abaolute material propertiea in the reatrioted form ^ 



3%;ase • 


In this oaae the absolutely uioonditional properties of an 
°^^^°* are pntioally dependent with respeot to the natnre of the 
object in queation and also to ita axtsUmms kb other absolutely 


what we have In minf)i 

uucondition^l^properties but they are ontloally Independent and 
autonomous ta/regard to ita remaining qualitiea ffor instance the 
acquired onea er the externally conditioned) and to everything ji^ 
existing outaide of it. On the otb^r hand the nature of the obj-f-ot 
would be in thiscaäe"'. dependent «aÄ^ta'^SaoluteisErnmnnntcfciasid, 
propertiea. I do not prejudge now whetfaer such a nature of objeota 
is poaaible and what oonditiona ahould be fulfilied *±/auoh a cloae 

"''^'i^ijL^'''^ '^' ^^^'^ °^ ^^ °^»«°* ^^^ oertai^^%^rtiea^' 
^^^i*t^-*,%öiUtM,#,nevertheleaa auch a posaibility of atruoture 
Of objeota ahould be oarefuUy weighed. One oould «aroly-suppoae 
that the absolutem/ m ae iidiUoual propertiea (in the reatrioted 

3)if w« opoale o*^ta eaaence, Sup-nosing thÄ^ 
. . T. /■; indlvidual / — e -^ 

''^i^"'°^? "' '" ^" 'gg ot^r/obj ects^^rtain relations and 
oonneotiona with our object^j^T^asence mH±/together with the 
eaaenoea of those other objects v/ould constitute the i^ixstt ultimate 
ontic baaia of all remaining proper tiesithejacquired onea, the 
externally dependent and the relative onea, 

Thia would be the ultimate^oore or ^^rnelof the whole atruotura 
Of the remaining part of the objeot »?WMo«owl^^cide not only what 
the Objeot aotuall2_la but that it ia a apecifio dlsorete faotor 
within the multiplicity of co-existing individual objeota and that 
it introduoes 9««« «genuine ^e into the fnlloonj^ objeota 
belonging to a certain »rsa?« claaa. let us not prejudge ta thia 
time whether auch a oonoept of the eaaence of an object ia correct 
and whether_everz individual objeot muat and oan posaeaa. an esaenoe 

and/or abaolutely unoonditioual propertiea fat leaat in the restrioted 
aense). We ahall be able to to^iythis problem W-^ ^^^penetratc^^^ 
moro deeply into the esaenoe of an individual objecto In the meantime 

we muat desoribe more yjnr^nrty explioitly the abaolute^ 


propertiea in the two variationa of meaning mentioned ^wHVFrr ;Tiii3 

would atreaa their differenoe-in the senae mentioned previoualy- 
from all the other kinda of prop er t|J.; and/or oharaoteriatica of the 
individual objeot. 

tion (1ftt-s 

JLer propertj ia absoluteiy /If it haa noi ontic founda- 
•^ nlnn ttTfraritMi/^^^ aubject of thJir propert^? .itxxa :äbt^ OtfT^ 

fefiuuDCÄaÄMxJcfcB» fcfcdbyan eaaential property,it iST o^u/u^r -^ 

linked indiaaolubly with the objeot in aueation.Thia meana that if 
the property ia annihilated ,the objeot itaelf lo de stroy er d ,eapecial- 
15 ita conatitutive'SS^urjiC^his must not mean that the absolute!!^ 
unconditional propert^ ia in itaelf wholly inimutable ,1 aiiisad^ mr:=^^-^^ 
U/hen analyzing aome temporal objeotafeapecialls organiama)//^ 



there are qualitiea whioh become ever more perfect and better 

Hi^ reachj^t 
formed aa the object developa until tWrratyttCT^imgkirK a certain 

Optimum Whioh it retaina or loaea-aau^äe-n&Äöfijaaj^ J^^ it "growa 

jf ru ö State of ^ 

oldt/l/ -ebUd devolve« to/aenile shrinking. Suoh ohangea connected 

with the oocuxrenoe or the developmental stagea or the atate of matur- 

ity of auoh abaolutels unconditional propertiea and of the oonatitutive 

natura of the objeolkre - if they they ocour at all- oo-dependent^ 

^ autonomoua ^ regulär ^ ^ , :, 

5!he5 exhibit a oertain/autgÄJocx form of/prooeaa which may be disturbed 

by external in^l^ences but which ia very characteriatio of the 
life-hiatory of aub^ an rather oonatitutea one more proof 
of the »»absoluteneaa" of auch propertiea, of their independence 

within the framework of their aubject* 

-^A/iC o/t^«^ indepni-i rinnt 

If we m^iMit. -i^JAhe "iüdiaaoluble" and "aÄtÄÄsmaM" character 


'* , 

Of tn, absolutol, un»o„dltlonal and »s.entlal ..opartUa, t.en t.eae 
negative ter™ are ^ onl, .eana Ä at„sain6 a oanaln posUlva 

n an. „tha, .„ .,,3 po/i.e Cara.tar.Bnt t.ere ia not dou.t tha. 
"» lattar w"=h ie^ tha a.oep^lonal atanaing ot thaaa 
propertlaa witMn tha Ä^ ^n ob.aot It 1. „ , 

, «IjaititmJalvii^'™'''"'''*^'**^'^^^ >™»« thoaa propertla. 

fST^vean tha- and tha conatdt„tlva natura of t.a objaot Th, , 

«f thla oof^eadon ia to ta aongil/lnh^"^''. • 

sougot/itt tho materlal oonatltution of 

t 03. propartia, and a^t.a natu« 0. t.a o.,aot. ,,a ,«d u in .ind 
w.en „, aiaw.ara a.out -aasantial nnit,." .Ms oohasion is 
Of auch a 3trangth^,.at it ,^, ,, annihilatad onZ, .ith tÄ?^'^ 

struotfon of tü'e/ot J ect itaal-p <-p *-^,^ ?* ^■^l 

aueatxonable ^«rrfOTrfSr-absoluteir ^v^-^-^^.. - 

I -^ ""nonaiBioual propertiea within 

radioaZ maaning of tMa tarm bA«t.fc^ i.a. i»u»».a-a« ^-^ 
Of t.a „ pn„ordial ontio natoa of t.oaa P.opartl.a....a na^l, ^ 
suo^opanies ara not „nX, indiaaoinUa .V«,f,a«,»^.™.H.,«,..^ 

that an objaot ontloaUj primordial ia not aubjaot to »n, , . •, 

»LiDjeoi; to any external 
influenoea that could alter i f a ok«-.t 4. , 

uxa alter ita absolutely unconditional 

propertiea. The ontioally primordl«i «„k. *. 

,„ ,,, ,, ,i^ $e^^»l^^i "'"'^'^^^^ "°'^l'i ^« tbua auperior 

to all other xx objecta ^ 

would be ab3olutel2^_inde£endent - at 

least in ita eaaenoe- of all othox «i^* *. , 

any _\ependent proper tiea.tSL^io JL°^ve?o 'Je 'o ?°'^'^ ^^ ^^^ ^«^'^i-e 
xhis wouldmean that^he absoliJ^"Uj,,^i,S^-Jjtiona^ 

the radical aenae WU^t.UWt*woald h«.«A:^?^H.... . 
of exiatence in the nature of tiie 
have to be materially iS^ä^in 
not exiat. 


eot itself. This nature would 


^iae aaeation.however.whether ideal ^ualitiea of thia 
whioä would coustitute onticaily primordial objeota in the 

rlgoroua aenae of thi- nv^ 1^°^ ^^^^^^^^ . 

or wii. ..crd./oannot be deoided hero. I raiae it 

onlyftopoln^out a cortain llmltlng optimal oase of absolute 

proporties of an objt'ol sud i-v j.}, r to v^^-'-sa tUnt 
such H c^-»??^ doen not oc?m tc «>' :c<K:iiiämt iapo.alblo^ Jhe iaüa.::-!! 
\i'hofvlior it faA^iinlls^^oours oouAd onl,7 -looid^a" iicücipivoicil iiw-^duig- 
ation* ßut .nc^iTnii:! oato '.ogicul iami-v/alioald siovj ulu p o^aibilit;^ 
of Biioh a cloae ocnriGoticn betu'eoa :hi ^^ropf^rtloa ?n.d ulic nata/j o:? 

an obj.^ol} a8 ma^^ ooour wLtliin ua. ^^rsnaüor^ c. wiij jiJds..oi 

, •> 


V ? 


ITrdTer£*it7 of Cracovj 

Bv'ii^ui in£ardca 


it liad no propertioö (characteriäticö i apart; fi^on ita 

uwi» ciilß'l; if 

^^1224-S --ro^Täile^B of its coruaci tutlou- '^^■LlJii*''^ a oeri;aiu 
qu<iji\/rt^ o." - oüGluiicX;; u..üoudd uionv-1 prcp^r^oa^tivül rov^uiroo 
ol':;cidatio>.u 'i*i:u^ iö cne ox übe ooiitrcl i^robl^iia of tbu "c;;)aenoo of 
an objeot;. I oliull ütill tai:© it u^)» 

On Relations 



-?rm^- f ar ■ I - • wgtB-4eft3:43a^ wir ^fe State of 

1 \ (rtt-tK.-^^ U'^/i^i ^AXO^ S>^ 

afzairs conoerning one 

individual subjeot^ i.e. vjhere the subjeot of an aotivitj or of 
a proper ty -w«« either an individual objeot or an object of a more 

here were State/- of 
affairs where there were more participating elernenta.' ^hQ fo'llo T rh r^ 
ÄÄÄ*^iee3-Tiisy -^^i^spil^fy- tM^ 1.\a is greater than B. 2.>An ass 
reserables a horse. sJa brother is a relative of his sister. 
4,^ Peter beats Paul. sAPeter hateafloves) Paul. Suoh states of 

affairs differ distinotly frora those i.vkQy9 v.o lia'^y'mere 



or oomp^mjgiiBflgjBtaEOf affairs of the same type 
tion of Single inüividuals linked only by thought/i\r instaneei^ 

jpeter and Paul v/ent togetlier for a walk or yWcw/ers on the meadow 

(7 in prinoiple 

are like so many colored spots . The latter do not differK/from the 

individual states of affairs mentioned before.äaoat The examples 

1-5 ,however , are different beoautae a oertain property of suoh a 

gfygmrK fljgxA^ggg ygTyiffj^gryinr State of affairs oonoerns at least two 

■ "—1' II. »■ . Jl^^^^Wfc— ^ii^f 


ob.jeota > It outreaohea as it were one of them' and and links^ 
with the seoond one .3*milarly an aotivity exercised by one of the 
objeots turns to the other and may even influenoe it in a oertain 

measure. I shall oall all suoh properties "relational"©»^« ,'they 

play a great role in the struoture of State of affairs mtif ütim^^a 
a, multiplioit^; of ^ Ictt^y^^t^ ^-vf^i^fM-w^ 

lubjeots^^'^They (tgigi i ^ i (the solidity ,the inner oohesion of suoh 

States of affairs. In this sense they are the constitutive factor 

ind tfofffther at least two dianretA Jihifir^ta ^vl+-r^ r»^..,.^ 

ftS tjiiey' bi 

elements of one state^of affairs. If we say "A is greater than )t;' 
or "sinilar to" or "related to"Psuoh a property defines one objeot 

^^u^^Tv^ S ^. 7^^ Zweien 



DUt because ü/ia aa if v,«-«- 4.u 

^ ^' " '''^« *^« reaalt, the qulntessenoe of 
Ol its being simultane ouslv oharof^tav..»*.. 

. U8iy cüaracteriatio of two different oblects. 

Wn one hand it is the propertv ^ .^ ^^ objects» 

it r.^ . Property Ki Of the aubjeot A and on the other 

it refera to the object B which ii- "* v . . 

certntn *^^®^ ^^^° acoourt" in ita 
materiftl r\a*-v,y.^ t,. ,. ^erTiain ^ -^^ •'•''0 

lal natu.», n ,.s a/„o,reapon..n„, „Ä^ ,,, 3,,^, „,^,„, 
*lo. . .3 .. we„ 3 ^„„,,„^ ,^^,^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^^ 

greater than" oorreaponds "amalier than";to "left" 
correaponda "right-to "similar" "similar" nu . 
„^. , „ ' Similar" .i'heae two statea of 

.acte, „on^eots ..e »„„ „,,,,.3.u .3 .,oa.3 u .,,, ^„^,,,„ ,^ ^^^ 

the independent atatua ofv anv o-p ^ ^u ^^pair 

^0 one^«,.;fno/property oan belong at the aame time 
to more than one obleot)« «o«h . . 

ated fran^ther.^.Aa for the state of affaira oont • • 

ijlioifi, «^P V. . -2-»»^ aiiaira contammg a multi- 

pxioity of subjects Triiiiüi a^ay^r.^ ^iy^ j. 

»**»h exeroia^ transitive activity .thinsa 
are a little different.Shis activitv n 
n... ...... .. , . ^^^-^^-^y -ay cause °^angea^injhe^^ob|ect 

aubjecta;*^ they may^g^^r;;!?;;;^;^ 

_. -. -^ X v' there ia 

o^^«4 . . -^ -xauüiüu. A State of 

inste., p.opertiea) ia the aort of a factor that oould lin. 

together[two^exi8tentiäli3^dependent objeotafinn^rTr;: ~-y 

T4- A A \ ^ — fl- L "oj eots\ia the higheat dee-reey^ 

It ia in auoh atateabf affairTThTT"^ * "-^g^e^ 

later. the unity of being of the world. 

atatajof affaira with a multipiioitv of «„>, • . 
„„, , ^ -^Piiciuy Of aubjeota may oocor not 

only between two aingle subjecta but alao betwa.n 

uo axao betv/een a great number of 


them.Then v/hole groups of oonneoted objecta are formed and thair 
link may be more or less close depending on the materlal natura of the 
given State of affairs, Stataf cf affairs v/ith a ranltlplioitj? of 
subjacta imy l arv a t ^ r-mr i eluol da t i e ft e -» the form of relationship 


as such if that *^/possible 

what we have in mind if v/e talk about a 
certain "relationahip betv/een A and B ,we are impressed b^/ the fact 
that in general all sort^of properties are attributed to relationships . 

We aaj? that a relation is s;7mmetrioal,for instanoe 1>^«Hf of equalit^ of 
of iiiÄMxrs±atrßKÄfcry kinship « that it has tv/o or man^ terms -that 
it is transitive like. the relationship of maj » ^ ' i ^ ^ ^thTt there are 
one-to*one or one-to-man^? relat:i.onships eto. It ieema that relationa 
have auch v/ould seem that a relation aa a subjeot of suoh 
properties ia an object. It would ,hov/ever ,seem at the same t/me 

relationia*r is ra dioally differ ent from the 

objects f h i ^ we J.ealt with when analj^zing the form of an individual 

objeot and eapecially of a primÄrdially individual ob.ieot i^e. 

a oertain individual aquare or a Bm±Ä±Ä/object ffor instanoe thia 

roae-bush here) whioh may ta/" terms" of a relation a^ ma;? stand in 

a oertain relation to other individual objeots bu^^ 



telations-even if they contain some relationa* 

mu^ seema 

ühis differenca aeems to be basio : while it/ something aocidantal 

for indi4idu4|l objeots (eapeoially/primordial onea) to kH±Ä stand 

in a certain relationship to other "non-relational" objeots (although 
tha;^ can never ba thamaelvea relationa in the aenaa anal^^zed lere) 
it seama something^aeoondary for relationa to ba objeota, i.e. 
atbjeota of somerpT^l5e"rtiea belcnging to them^although such propertiea 
oertäinly do not belong to tham merelj^ aooidentallyjL It saema furtharmora 
that ralations are really something completaly different from 4non— /7^ 
relational objecta and that thoae properties whioh ^S& therJ^fUje^J^ 



„ those derivlng ^ 

^ objeota are d^a-r-Hrgt^ preoisely/frou this differenoe^ Objeotnaasyoon-^ ^ 

atitutes a aort of aaper st ruoture of thex relation as 4w» liiiiJ ii»i»«\in 

prooeasea but #«iwNi^grrelätion afifeMiL «in ita apecifio fiiveraity 

from ''non-relational" objeota 4?«p/nothing elae that j a certaln stat e 

of affaira marked by the multlplioity of subjecta ^ f^wr/^elation would Pe^4K 

prirna facie\ to bei preoisels' thia State of affaira with a multiplioitj^ 
of sub3e(bta wie^/i »'relational'' aspeot whether r^#^=551eproperts-or 

. Instancea of relations 

in the theory of relationa v/ould point in this direction. But this 
aaaumption is nevertheleaa false and in^anj^^aj auperfioial* It is 
true that/^elationship constitutes a state of affaira with s multiple 
subjeots but lP(^1!TT)f another t^^pe than those nentioned 
m^faiy^ .-^»-Mt^ 5 »'relational" oonstitutive faotor. This State of affaira 
with multiple subjeota whioh oonstitutea a relation between two "ob- 
jeots" oan eaaSS' be grasped ^xy\sjdr^e^A£}^^>G:£^'^^ relative I37 eaaily in ita 
specific natufe^'namely^in "W5Se ^a;i^s;iLv/here the theoretioiana of re- 
lationa speak about s. ''aj^mmetrical" relation , 1J .güi - i^otang ^ -siiailarity 

equalitj? eto. 

• If jhowever ,aayrametrioal relationa are 


i^volved -where therefore the relation between a and b ia different 

from that of b to a -aa it ia usually said not quite coreeotl^?- OAxA^ 

v/here therefore a ia amaller than bÄ4;hat b| ia greaterjthan a / 

the difficulty of graaping the apecifio easence of the relation i;:s^ /(tc^>Pi^ 

considerable and KSXBJß±±M^ real, ilone of the statea of affaira 

deaignated by theae two sentencea ia in a atrict senae really the 

apecifio relation obtaining betv/een theae two subjeota ;rather lial it 

f/ ^>#7^ 

the dual- subjeot -skate of affaira v/hich is at the I ftiät^ i of mt 


those statea of affaira : a<b and b':^a • It is onL^ throagh 

a valuational atreaa^ that züngle out in one oaae a and then b ^h^ dti/ 





We oould expreaa this in the following way : the "ob.jeotive" relation- 
anip betv/een xk± a and b may be onoe streased from the oB]FOJ^r^?*T^^ 

then it is a relatlonshlp of •• amalle rneaa'' betv;een a and b 'or it 
may be taken up from the atandpoint of b and then it beoomes a rela- 

tionship of "greaterneaa" betv/een b and a« But in Order to graap 

the esaenoe of this autonomous ur.iform multiple -subleot state of 

affaira whioh obtains between those two objecta ,it ia atrictly speak- 

ing not neoeaaary to streas valuationally either a. or b. Theae are 

rather aubjeotive aapeota of auch an ob.jeotive relationship -which 

is a dual-aubjeot -relationship and doea not aaaignCF&^ny of ita 

terma aig^ auperiority, A relationa«|^ is something that oocura pre- 

ciaely in equal mea sure between two^ or more äubjeota fiÖ .This ia 

natarally true of aymmetrioal and/Mymi:ietrioal relationa, only in the 

aae of the aaymmetrioal onea it ia eaaier to -rrntmoV the "oblective" 

he aapeota from the point of view of ita/te^rma. 

In the ayftimetrioal relations those aapeota (aait were ^^aü^üMp the re- 


lationship itaelf • One could aay here that in such a caae an 

ectaality between a and b and one between b and a ia not in faot that 

relationahip v;hioh obtaina between two objeota if a ei^uals b. 

But how to name this "objeotive" relationship whether in the caae of 

aymmetrioal or asymmetrical relationshipa? Aa long aa we oonsider the 

relationship in ita primary form tkntytii i.e. aa a multi-lEjtject- atate 

of affa^lra ,it is ,3triotly speaking ij^possible to name it./|ljt#V^ 

ooin/suoh a name we try to graap such a relationaship in the specific 

aspect of ita natura and we proooed by that token froLi ita oi^ii.rrv 

form to iija objecto« Sllperstracture" . 

^resarve ita primsry form|t-| , i n i*ti \jk onlv in formine: 

an assertive aentence /and then we must stress valuationall^^ one of 

the terma of the r :lation beoauae we have onl;; uni-aubject- sentenoea 

'Te say in other worda that a is amaller than b| orjb is greater than a 

but we cannot graap in a name *r predioete -toiiy very relationahlp fuAdcM^ 

im IBM »Hl i»w et) ö_hind 
^KiAe4>4e trry^BrTix:>7?rtwHHH/TSe a e tv;o statea of affairs naraely the faot 

that this is one and the same relation :^TgTTligtkxgfTtlT«Tny:tfeggKira(ä:TqDgj^ 


obtainx/simaltaneously in e lual meaaure fcr botih cf tlioin^ That ia why 

the theoretioians of ialc.tions are usually stopping at ^hose as ^ota 

of a relationship (F0?eri^i»g to one of its terms ^nd do not jpetietrate "^«^^ 

lK>\^Mtk, L^ >, ci ■ i'(ila ' bi o »ioj ii4^>u.>e iü^^Lie specific struotureiÄxa/.Thej? are 

lesa ooncerned with fiiiding out the ultimate form of -fe-jg-w relations 
than with ^ 

KKXtÄ/oonstructing a thoory of rolations asauming as a premi 

±2i?±i:ßdtü3C their unexplained form. Ihe faot that the theoretioians of 

relationa^it^ do not pene träte their oore is to be seen from the fol- 

lowing 3fe»^ithey sa3? tha* to any relationsül^ xRy oorreaponds a con- 

f di^ferent 

verae relation jH'x as though there were here two/relationa / 

relations betv/een x and y/while there is aasDciscaH: in faot onl^; one« 

«a»/<5ne relation iUilw %^y ^d© «iftf 1N*e state of affairs \ltttok oonstitutfJv^^l 

the exiatential baaia of those tv/o statea of affaira aRb ffor instance ^ ' 

a is sftialler than b|) and bR*a (\\ is greater than a) referred to one AAur A^ 

termCof the relation34**-p in such a v/aj? that reSia term ia oonverted into 

the aubjeot of ttaifrelational propert3?j^ /m Q^^TicJh* 

'!7e beoome now av/are of the faot that apart from the 

multi-term«i#^state of affaira (aa for instance in the oase of the 

relational aapeot "a is smaller than b|" where the seoond subjeot 

first one 
is merel37 a point of referenoe for the ±suQSKr, i.e. an "object" 

d/to bj? the relational faotor and not a aubjeot within the strict 

meaning of this terml there are "multi-aubjeotiaft "-»statea of affaira 

in the real sense of thia termithey are those whioh oonstitute 

between two and more xxk^xKlx at leaat 

a relationnbrir wtiryttryyiniririrtTrg objeota« Here v/e have/two effectual 

objecta not onl:y aa subjeots of propertiea v/ith a relational faotor 

explalned here aa »'aapeots" of a relation but as existential 

bases -aa oarriera of an oocurrence between then and their 


"fa*l«±r r.latlon^l ,Kö±tt« prop.rtj t« l„ t^, ,trlot .^„«t. 
»eanlng « "relatlonsUp" t.e. „ that lnlefl,:abl, "" „sloK 
for™ a sup,r3tr.otnr. aiove the. and a n,„ ilnd of llnj. ,,,„,„ t,, 
. link that jolns them together «Ith that "betwe.n" mto on, „hole J 
a higher ordex. That "..tween" doea not constltut, th, p.opert, a nor th, 
P-Pert, l i„,ofar a and h ar. tho ter»a of a sooaUed relatlonz .It la 
no pr^^nj of a-J^^lt U for„aU, so^ethlng apeolflo .hloh ™.- 
m that form the^S^Jipatlon In two (or more) objeots/ , a sort of 
ä^££^le radiallt, ^ and that Is „h, It ia no propertj at il. 
'^ ' ""■ - ^^' oyeou^r. not slmpl, anbjeota of^^opertj for that' 
"between" and th, ia^ doea not detern^ne the. ,ualltatlvel, Uhus it 
foea not mmi the «m ^notlon of a prope.t,,. m a formal sense the, 

'" "'°™ " °' - "l-"™.-..thlng »hloh is an „bject for Its.lf, ata,a 
outalde that "betw.en "=*t^ ^ ,„„,,^ ,„, ^^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^^ 

.^trnth la '-.a^ U^U p^eoual, the ter„a of Relation «Sfi^ter^Ie 

"«-*«-p-*«-«pnr ^terlal natu., ^^^that "betv,e,n- and b, the 
Same token^^6he whol " '^ Ä£«A^i«^/»t.«yv.*vr . 

e relation; in additio^t^^^fX^a oo-deterxninl 

ation: the material moment of that relational "between" is alwaya a 

SJ^iaLT''"' °' '°*'-°' °" ^'^- *"- °^ ^'^^ -lation or of their 
/aej^ed proper tiea. This co-determination doas not mean that ever, 

ter^d/ aomething to the determination of the relational "between" 

regar^l^s^the other terma of the relation,of their n^terial nature ^ 
it ia ' — "^^ ' 

oo-determination,a oonmon determination-in the most striot aense 
°' 's^nlZtV' ''^' -lational "between- ao that the "between" in .ueation 
is a/resultant of the material nature of all terma. Oni the other hand 
this aynthetio reaultant coniaina material pointera in the direction 
Of ita terma ,i.e. of ita aource .ita derivation. I shall c U the re- 
lational "between" the "link" or "core" of the relation. 

The ob^ecta forming the terma of the relation not onl, determine 
materially thia "core" but are often the e.istenti.i h.«.„ .. ... /?^ 

1 8 

* tion of that oore and aa a result of the relation itself. This is linked 

with the Problem of the essenee of the relation often disoasaed: how and 

relation oan exiat 

in v/hioh way relationa exiat and eapeoially whether 

although ita 

KxJriWödtxtks terma do not exi^t. I would like to streaa ^ 

faSniiat ti» ^^S3??«5553Tor^a ** relational link" in tt» (faTln 
lsfce\aiarl\xl€rl^J'e4iJMr^^ t\i0/>£;j^^ÜAjlto»4 the terms of the relation 1^ 

aoq.uire in their formal atructure the relational propertiea ( '^smaller 
than" ,"greater than*' ) vrta^SlW^L/'iier^^ mentioned. I oall them -in regard to 
the relation- the producta of the relation B which oolor the terma of 
the relation. They then oonstitute a special type of "property" although 
they are really no '^propertiea'^ since they are materially and existentially 
oo-determined b^? the oora of the relation and by the same token by the 
terma of the relation.They are therefore rather aomething not proper*^ 
but^^ien to the objeot, aomething fproed on itx ,something like a reflex 
-i» illuminaSJ^'V ^i hi » riight^i yiile^ ku uut? (jUuIi % ym. .l shall therefore 
call them iiyregard to the objects Im* which they Jb(ilfi>iiy '^relative pro- 
pertiea" in the striot aense» I shall deal later on with the analyaia 

of "relative propertiea" in another aense^But these relative propertiea 
J.n thq -preaeT^t senge ^ 
ma? runctlon with regard to the terma of the relation aa constitutive 

factora of the relation itself .This is the case *hen we talk about such 

objecta aa "father" and "son" , "husband " 

"r±Ä±Äg-horse" etc. 

and "v/ife" , "rider" and 

In all these casea the ob.Ject doea nut function in ita 

own constitutive natura aa an individual Brlityflrig but exclusivel3f aa a 


term of a certain relation to another object(also JodCÄÄ/as such a term) . 


•^t is a term materially determined by the ijore of 1ctrg/relation> 2hus 

the term of a relation ia differenttw^nr* -materially (due to ita 

relational natura- and formally -aa one of the oarriera of the relational 

link- from an individual object taken in itsraBaolute form and nature» 
This makea possible the distinction of the member of a relation from 

Roman In/yarden O 

I The formal easence of the relatlon# 

L i(^ \ är%. ^^m' 

'i *:'*> ^'iV4'-4-tt'.'h.-i:.i 

Till now I have occupied myself almos-exlusively with tho 
States of things holding vd.thin an object or - to put It better • with 
those involving only one subject, i.e. thoae states in idorii - wUiuhH :^ 
only one individual ft ^ j i t * or one ohject of a higher or lover degre© 
-wWtoh functions as a subject of a »-aj;p«iini ' Jgtufc property or t*wt of an 

actione wkieh " t a keo -^i^^feaHg^. But I have m e u fuixied that there exist <jal80 s< 

partakej^ciSore^ than one ohjec^^and 
other statea of thing> in which^tlipM» »inttitiiMftiliBiimi^ 

do so in no other way than as a basis for the appurtenance of at least one 

property to at least one object or as that for the accomplishment of an 

action by at least one object. The states of things determined by the 

following clausea may serve as exapples 1. "A is greater than b»*, to 

take a particalar example; *»the Bleesed Virgin Mary^s church is gre ter 

than the St Alberte's church*'. 2. •'An ass is similar to a horse»*, 5. »»A 

brother is a relative of his sister'S 4« •» Peter beats Paul", 5. ♦'Peter 

hates y^loves)^ Paul«. These exaples differ in a dlstinct way from the 

states of thin^ in which there partakes also more than one individual 

object^but in which the role palyed by the partlcular objeota is \inlike 

that played in the examples quoted arid similar to that of the objects in 


the states oi things disussed in the preceding chapter, ^mLjm^ e.g. 6. 

«Peter and Paul went out together for a walk", or 7. "The flov/ers on the 
raeadow are marking themselves by many-colured stains« . 'ja^f i^xaples 6 and 
7 are either classes op states of thing^^ each state with a Single subject 
the elements of which classes are bound only by thougit, or the exam^les 
in quostion are composite st ites of things of the saine type. In their ge- 
neral structure the^ do not differ from the states of thin^^ which have ^ 
been consideretl in the procedin^;; chapter. Agrin,the exaffl^ies given sub 



1 - 5 «»e differJdig^ In an essen tlal way, from the states of thlngs 
with^aingle sub^eot In that they Inolude such propertles as, while apper- 
talnig to one of the objects wlthln a state of thlng, determine, due to 
thelrmatter. at lettst two ob.lecta ; In each particular case, a property, 


while appertaining to one of the objects •'is related", at the sarae time, 
to another object l^reap^. • in the case of actions - an action is accoia- 
plishe^ by one of the objecto but it is Jfdirected^ towards anothei; object)) 

ot ^&.^s ^r^5-^ 


Thereby, the property 4hb as ^.#-*t^ütog out« beyond Its boundaries', ^^ joinfatg 

in a peculiar way, another object, In other wordsj the matter of the gi- 
ven property includes, in this case, a peculiar moment of ftference to an 

other object* Sindlarly, an action which is accomplished by an object goes 

ou^ bryond its limits in that it is, usually, not only "directed« to an-* 

other object but «»passes to it, i.e# influences it in some way. I shall 

^elTenävour to explain more exactly the peculiar nature of this kind of 

material e ndowm ent of a property of an object, but ss^ first I shall give 

the name of »»relational«» qualitative moment to the moments in question, in 

Order to separate them fron the rest of the endo\ment, They play an es- 
pecially importr\^t role in the structure of such states of thinp;3 as in» 

volve more than one subject injeach case» It is, namely, they which deter- 

mine the uniformity, the coherence of such states of things* It may be 

Said that they are a^ constituting agent fo* tarfc the states in qucstion 
in the sense that they bind at least two separate objects ij^tü the ele- 
ments appertaining to one another within a Single State of things. We say: 
"A is greater that B". This "greater than«» or - as in other states of 
things - ••similar to«*, «»a relative of somebody«» *tc», is a property qua* 
lifying a Single object, however, b^ no means due to there being suppo- 

in the property^ a peculiar separate quali- 
l^property s/ being as irf' a consel 
as ya' B. quintessonce of the simultaneous appertaining of certain partica- 

sedly contained in 

ty, closed in itsolf , but due to its /property s/ being as j^f a conse!uence 


lar properties to two different objects: on the one hand, It Is a conse- 
quence of the properties of the object A to which It appartaln itself , 

and on the other hand, that of the properties of the object B, to which 

it is related» wliich is in its material endowment «taken into accoxint*. 

peculiar analogue 
At tem same time, it has its mxtmciuixmckmmsxkx in this second objectf 

it is true. the analogue in question does not occur explicite in the gi- 
ven State of thing, but it is an anaioßous constituting a^ent oi the se- 
cond State of thing which second State is as if a mirror iraage /"converse" 
of the given state of thing. To the moment ••greater than" there corres- 
ponds the moment jeaübastSJoeSt ♦♦smaller than«», to the moment »left** the mo- 
ment ••rlght*', to the moment ••similar" tle moment "similar" and the like* 
These two states of thing: »»A is greater than B" and "B is smaller than A*» 
appertain to one another so closely that they seera to be only an expres- 
sion or a manifestation of the mere co-existence of the objects A and B 
possesing particulai}q.ualities of just some kind and not other. It is true 
that a relational qualitattve moment •'binds^' • as I have said - the two 
objects v/lth each other and, by that very fact, it is a uniting element 
in States of thing, involving more than one subject, but, at the same 
time, it functions in this way only to its being »based*» - if one be per- 
mitted to say so - on the properties of both the objects concerned. But 
as i% appertains only to one of them /because no property can appertain 
to more than one object/ the ••bond*' uniting the objects in ^estion like- 
wise does not violate, either object formiug a whole closed in itself , se- 
parated from the other, of course on condition that the given ••objects'* 
had not lost their distinctness ofr some other reasons. The case is some- 
what different v/ith states of things, involving, each of them, more than 
one Ä3B;jÄatsubject, w.ich states are sronstituted by a "tranüitive«' action« 
If the given action causes some changes in the object to which it passes 
the two object concemed do not cease, indeed, in consequence of this 

In/Garden 4 ^ 

" ^ to open 

action, to be two objects but in spite of that they begln as if 

themselves reciprocally for each otheri there exlsts a sixrface of their 

contatct. of thelt mutuld *eactlon* And an activity State of thing, InvoL 

ving more than one subject, Is, lüdeed, the very agent whlch can tbind*» 

wlth each other, in the relatively highest degree, sone two objects exist 

tially self-supporting in relation to each other# On the sm occ\irrenc of 

such wkkmm of things there is based, as we shall yet see, the existential 

unlty of the world* 

The States of thing, each State Involving more than one subject, 
may occur, of course^ not only between t.vo objects but also between more 
than two ob^ects* There are formed then the whole groups of objects apper-| 
taining to one another and the connection between them may be more or 
less close« This depends, inter aliai on wheter the given objects are 
«bound« by a Single State og thing, includlng many subjects, or by a num* 
ber of States of things, amybe of varinus kinds» The closeness of the re- 
lation depends, however, first of all, on the material endwment of the 
given State of thing. Alle these are questiouÄ to which I shall yet retum 

At first, however, the states of thing, involving more than one 
subject, may serve the purpose of explaining the form of a relation, If 
this be at all possible. 

Ihen we begin to reflect on what we have really to do with in 
the case of a •'relation" between A and B we are Struck, first of all, by 
the fact that relations are generally viewed as possesing various proper- 
ties. It is said, e.g., that a certain relation is symmetricja, that it 
may comprise two or more terms, that it is transitive as the |reater-than 
relation, that it is an one-one relation or an one-niany relation, and the 
lilce* It seem that such properties do really appertain to relations t Thus 
a relation, as a subject of these properties, seems to be an object. At 

the same tlrae, however, It seems that somethlng of the kind of relation, 
*s radically dlfferent from the objecto we had flrst of all in view 
when we were analyzing the form of an indlvldual object and, in particu- 
lar, that of an object primarily indlvldual, and so, inter alia, eg. s<kme 
thing like a certain indlvldual Square or like a certain thing /e.g« 
thls rose-bush here/ whlch objects ma be, Indeed, the «terms^ of various 
relations, belng able to be related, In various ways, to otlier indlvldual 
oojects. but which are themselves no relations even though they should 
include relations of some kin^ or other /I shall yet retum to tliis ques- 

tion again/. This difference seems to be so essentlal that, as it seems 

contingent or, at any rate, derivative for individixal objects /and, in 

. . u 

Parti cular, for those promarily indlvldual/ to stand or to be able to stan( 

related, in some way or other, to other "non-reltlonal" objects /thou^^ 

the obejcts in question themselves be \inable to ever become relations in 

the sense analyzed/, so, reversely, it seems derivative for relations to 

be objects and so to be subjects of some properties, though their being 

objects be certainly nothing contingent if such properties be really ap- 

pertaining to them» At the same time relations seem to be in realltv some- 
thing altogether dlfferent from objects /non- relational ones/ and it is 

precisely being dlfferent whlch seems to be the source of the pro- 
perties which by the very appertaining to them tum relations into objects 
Being an object is, for a relation, some kind of its superstructure , si- 
milarly as it is the case v/ith processesi ^nd what a relation really j 3 
in its peculiar dissimilarity with ^non-relational" objects, is nothin^ 
eise than a state of thing wMch involves more than onc 3ub.ieot> At the 
first glance, a relation seems to be just a state of thing, with more 

than one subject, constituted either by a »»relational« property moraent or 

by a transitive actlon moment. The various exaples of relations given raany 

a time by the authors concerned in a theory of relations seam to justify 

In/^arden 6 

thls oplnion» Nevertheless this opinion i3 faulty, aiid| at any rate, su« 
perficial. For a relatlon is, indeed, a state of thlng wiiich iavolves more 

than one subject "but this state is of some other type than the already 

j 2sed 

dlscusse^ st tes of thlng characterlK±± by a "relational*' constitutive 

moaent, This state of thing, luvolving more than one subject, wMch /sta* 

te/ forma a relation Holding betv/een two "objects** may be only in some 

cases relatiVBly easy grasped in Its sbeclfic nature, and, namely, in the 

cases in which the theorist of relations speak of a "symmetriaal'' relation 

and 30, e*^, where the matter is with similtirity, equality, and the like, 

Again, where we have to do with m±m3üLwa±tf a non-symmetrical relation,i«e« 

V9here - as is usually said thongh not qulte pertlnently • the ••relation«' 

in which a Stands to b is different from the "relation" in which b 


Stands to a • as e^g« when "a is smaller than b" "b is gre^.ter than 
a" • the difficulty of grasping the peculiar nature of the relation be-» 
comes considerable and essential^ For neither of the states of thing« 
determined by these two propesitions i s, strictly speaking, tliis £ro- 
per relation wliich prevails between the two objectsi the relation in que«» 
stion may be only identified with the state of thing includind - in this 
case - two subjects, which State lies at the basis of the states of thing 
a b and b a , and v/hich nnderlying state alone leads to t . e Constitu- 
tion of the states of thing, either a b or b a, due to its - so to 
speak - "assuming an expressed value*, one time asapplied to a , another 
time as applied to b. Let us put it otherwlser the "objective" relation 
prevailing in this case between two objects may be grasped either from the 
pgint of view of the object a and then it preseuts itself as t'^e so 
called "smaller- than-relation" of a to b, or from the point of view of th< 
object b and then it presents itself as the so-called "greater-than-rela- 
tion" of b to a. But, strictly speaking, in order to reach what is abso^ 
lutely autonomic one should refrain from ?giving an expressed value" to 

In^arden Y 

thl3 baaic 3in>ae State of things, with more than one subjects, whlch 
State holds between these objects - either frora the noint of vlew of the 
object a or from the point of view of the object b, Iheae expressed va- 
lues are, perhapa, rather mere sub.jectlve aspects of the objective rela- 
tion which involves Just two subjects /at least./ and which does not 
deterraine for either of these objects either a »priorlty« ;vith respect to 
the other or a more fundamental role \vithln the whole reletion, a role 
w*iich would oblige one to reflect the whole of the relation just, e.g. 
fromthe oolnt of vlew of the object a, and not from that of the object b. 

A relation Is .lust w hat prevails propot t i onately between two or more ob- 

jjifects. Thls holdS| of course, both non- symmetrica! and for symmetrica! 


relation, only that in the case of non-symmentrica! and for symmetrica! re- 
iatlons, only that in the caae of non-sjnnmetrica! relations it is easier 
to oppose an '»objective" relation between to its »»aspects" taken v/ith the 
reference to its particular terms • Again, in symmetrttal relations, these 
aspects are as if distigguising, with themselves, the relation itself. 
It may be said, here too, e#g,, the "equality" of a and b or the equa- 
üty" of b and a is not, properly speaking, tliis relations which pre« 
vails between two objects when a is equr.1 to b# But how should be named 
this "objective" relation both in the case of syrimetrica! and in that of 
non-symmetrica! relations? New, as long as we consider a relationin its 
primary form of stete of things, with more than one subject, whdch form 
is proper to it, the relation cannot be, strictly speaking, named » While 
choosing a name we endeavour to grasp a glven relation in a specific mo- 
ment of its natura , but doing so we pass from its primory form of a State 
of things to its "superstructure" of the nature of an ob;5ect» Agaln, we 
may pireserve the primary shape of a relation only when v/e are applying a 
predicating sentence, but in such a case we inevitably "give the relation 
its expressed value" with the reepcct to one of its terms, because we dis- 



pose only of tne-subject-seatexices. So we say, e,ß# , elther that a Is 

smaller tiiati b, or that b iß greater than a, belng unable to sTösP 

either v/ilh a name or with a predlcatlng senteiice, this relation whlch 

is coiicealcü beliind bliese tv/o ötates of thiu^s to ßrasp, namelyi iß what 

causes its beixig one for both the objects at the saüio ti^e , in Its pro-» 

pDötionate prevalling betv;ecn their:. Tlierefore it Is pretty natural that 

the theorists of relations stopp usvialiy at those "aspects»' of a relation 

rexerred to one of its termBf mia do iiot reach v/Lat lo the relation itself 

in its peculiar structure. For they care not so imich about discloslng the 

final foi-m o£ a relation aa ahout bullcing the theory of It, Eaving taclt* 

ly presupposed its still uiiexplained form« .And the theory of relation aims 

on the one hc.nd, at finuinx out their nost important propertles, on the 

other hand, a^^ain, at detectiur the possible derivative relations between 

relations resulting from these propertles» ?he failure in reaching the 

proper doniain of relations i^ diötinctly provod, e«^,« by the common ac- 
ceptance by the theorista of relations oi tno as^sertion tiiat every "rela«* 

tion" X R Y thore sVioulct o:cint a converf^e /imrers/ "relation" Y R^Z 


as if there prevailed tv;o difforont relations between X and Y^ while, as 
a matter of fact, the x^elr^tion het^veen I and Y is only one . But, as I 
have al»eady said, it is only a State of thin.^^-s wiiich may be this Single 
relation j thia State of thing forms an exlatrmti nl basis fot the occu* 
rence of the two str^tes of thin^ in question, a H b /e.p;* a is smaller than| 
b/ and b R'a /b is p;reater tlian a.^, reforred, each of them, to one of the 
terms of the relation, in tnis way, iua^ely, tlriatathe ^iven terra is taken 

' ^HiiC c omü'epi i ü Tt -o ? ^^le x ^aÄltia^ i^^^^^'' new ^ Cr, n/Weyl, Das Konti- 
nuum /1952/: ^'Knt gegen mathematischen Ausdrucksgewoimhoiten muss noch be- 
ton werden, daas die SÄtze "5 fol^:t auf 4'* und'U geht 3 voaran" einer \ind 
derselben Bezighung zwischen 4 und 5 \U3druci^ ^eben und dass da nicht von 
25wei verschiedenen Relationen die nede sein ^mnn, deren eine die ♦•inverse" 
der anderen ist,,#"» l*c. ^^ 'i i • 

as a 



Onljr havlng paiä attention to this fundamental state of thingi 

we reallze dlstinctly that besides the already discussed type of a State 

of thingK, invclving more tha one subject /as in the case of the relatio« 

nal aspect, •'a is smaller than b**/, in which State the second subject ap- 

pears only as a relation, as an ••object»* determined by the relational mo^ 

ment /and not as a subject in the proper sense of the word/, there exist 

st tes 4f things "vdth more than one subject** in a such deoper and more 

proper sens of the word, and namely those states which form a relation • 

here - between two or 
in the sense establiehed ^mtmifmmm^ji-mmikmmmm more objects* In these states 

there appear effectively /at least/ jdo« objects not only as subjects of 

propertis with a relational moment, which properties are explic-ted in the 

relation »»aspects" presented betöre a while, but moreover as existential 

basesj^bearers» - as it is said in the German: «»Träger«, fot the occur- 

rencd of a «relation ••, in the strict final sense of the word, between them 

and between their properties, i.s. of this inexolicable «between« built 

«over« them, a «between« which introduces an entirely new bond beti^'een them| 

it «biuds« them into a new whole of a higher de^ree, the objects apoertain* 

in^ to one another to^ether witfe this «between«» This «between« is neither 

the property of a, not property of b, if a and b are the so-oalled 

terms of a realtion, and it is no «property« at all. As to its form the 

«between« is something quite peculiar; its form implies, n.mely, an 

yppurtenance to two /or more/ objects, a sort of double or multiple formal 

reference, and this is why it is n o property* Correspondingly, the ob* 

jects in question are for this «between« likewise no simple subjects of 

joroperties, being, as to their qualitiea, not at all determined by the 

Said «between« /so the «between« does not fulfil the fimda.-ncntal function 

of a property/* So far as tholr form is cmcerned they are «terms« of re** 

iation, i.g., they are someth ng remainin^: beyond the «betv/een«, due to 



their being objects themselvest something determining it merely and func- 

tloning 83 a basls 

tor it* Because the fact of the matter Is that it 

l3 the terms of a relatlon whlch, due to their materlal endowmont, determl- > 
ae materially they '^between** and t by that very fact, the whole relatiom 
lliis is always effected by a c o-operatiom the material momcmt of the 
relational «»between" is a peouliar resultant of the natures of the t w o 
or of all the terms of a relation, resp* of their properties duly 
chosen« This ♦♦Joint" determinatlon is by no means of the kind as if each 
of the terms shilud add so.ething of its own to determine the matter of 

the relational "between** with n o regard to the remaining terms of the 

relation, ^vithout taking into account their raaterial endowraentf but this 
determination is, in the strictest sense of the word, a "common" one, 
realised in presence of the reöiaiaiug terms and with retard to them, so 
that the material dotermination of the relational "between" is a synthe- 
tiural resultaftt ot the aaterial en o\vment /of the properties and of the 
natures/ of a 1 1 the terms • Therefore, also iuversely, this synthetical 
resultant contains matericvliter ^odexes ^^ointin^ to its aeterminiiig 
terms, to what it "issuos** from, I shall call the relational »'between**, in 
its mattrial determinatlon , a »»bond** or a "core'' of zi relation« 

The objects fimtioning as terms of a relation do not only deter- 
mine its •'core'*, as regards its matter, but they are also a purely exis« 
tential basis for the "core" of the relation and, by that very fact, for 
the relation itself , t o hold « This fact is closely connected vdth the prob 
lern v/hich has be:en r:any a tinie discussed iu the literature ccnccrning the 
essence of the relation, the problem, naa^fiy, v<rhether and in what kind 
of manner do relations exist, and, in particular, whether a relation may 
exist though its terr^s should not exist* I shall yet retum to this ques- 
tion once more. At the present time, again, I must yet stress that the 



occurrence ol a relatioaa bond in its füll aynthetis material determlnation 
entails those relational moment, of the mature of properties as regard 
thels formal stinicture /•♦smaller than*» ^greater thanV, of whlch I have 
öooken prevlously, to appertain to the terms of thc relation. Referring 
them to a relation I call them the •»exponents«' of the relation R, marking 
themselves on the relation terma. While appertaining to aome terms the rela 
tlonal moments form, in the structure of those ter^.s, a special type of 
»properties« which, strictly speaking, are no "properties'* at all because 
whilo being materially and e:istentially deterrained also by the core of 
the relation and, by that very fact, also by the 3pejnainin^ terms of the 
relation, they are, in a certain degree, something «forelgn»*, so ething me* 
rely imposed on the object, as if only a reflex, an Irradiation, and not a 
•'proper lighf» Referring them to the objects they appertain to I shall 
call them the «relative properties in the strict sense of the word* Soon 
I shall occupy myself with tJiK an analysis of their form and with the vvay 
of distinguishing them from the »relative properties'* in other senses« At 

present, it should be only stressed that the soid relative properties, in 

the sense introduced here, «bbid fnnction as a • so to speak - »»relational 

constitutive nature" of the obejcts they appertain to, taken exclusively 
in their role of the terms of a relation, they m ay m aterlaliter constitute 
the terms of a relati on, This is the case when we speak oi such "objects" 
as »»father" and "son«», »»husband»» and "wife**, ''rider»» and •»saddle-horse»', 
and like. In ajl those cases an indivldual object is taken not in its own 
constitutilre nature wliich builds it for itself but exclusive ly as a term 
9f a relation in reference to another object /which is also taken vtxm onl; 
as a term of a relation/ and, moreover, as a term whose ma tter is determi 
ned by the eore of this relation, Thus a term of relation differs, both 
materially /due to its relational bond/ and forrnally • as one of the "bea- 
rers»» of the relational bond - from an indivldual object in its absolute 



nature and form« This enables us also to distinguish a term of a rclation 


from the fimdamentum rel ationls« TJiis fundamentum I3 formed by constituive 

natures or by those and oxily those propertlea of the objects providing an 
existexitial basis for the relational bona /of the beaxörs of the bond/ 
y^^^i-oh determlue the materlal moment of the bond /^core^/ of the rclation« 
This mooent of the bond Is, at tho same tlme, a material morüent of the 
conctitutlve nature of the relation as an "objecf of a peculiar klnd* 
3o, on the basls of cur considerationsi one may design the follOY/in^. Schel- 
me of the form of a two-terms relation, talren In ito primary foi^m of a sta- 
te of tlilng, involvlng more than one subjeotj 

Relation =^ object endowed wtth properties 

Relc.tion » State of thin^s, involvin^ morc thmi one 











► •* 

bond of the 








f «r. 
t«A r« 

t«B T. 

- the left relational exponei 

- " ri^ht « • 
• fiindamentum relationis 

- xerm A of the relation 

There may hold, howover, relati ons betweon relationo and 
relations between reltitions of relotions, ect« The we obtain on the one 
band, relation of higher and higher degree which, in their essentlal form, 
do not differ from relations betv/een objects being no more relations, and 
whose bearers of their relational bond posseaa alone a complicated form of 
relation; on the other hand, we reach relations in which the bearers of the 
bond are no more relations, and so are non*> relational objects* The question 
is how is it possible to distinguish a non*>relatlonal obiect from a relati o: 
To simpiify our task. In anawering this question, we shall confine ourselve^ 
merely to such self-aupporting non-relational objects as are primarily 



individunl objects /"concretum'»/ and not e.g. Ideas. Moreover, for some 
reasons which will be clear later-on, I do not take into account either 
events or processes, so I do not solve the question in an aböolutely gene* 
ral way* 

!• A reletlon, and in particular its bona, has its e:^d.stontial basis 

^^fi^^JrZ i^f at leaat, two individual /non-relational/ objects which are in- 

cluded either in it as ith terms or in the relation ?;bich form its terms, 

or, ete* An Individual object has no existential basis of such a kind. 

2* A rel ition /taken in its primary form and so as if before its 

objectifiation/ is a Single State of things, involving more than one sub- 

ject, of a form delineated above, a state underlying the relation as mxBx 

a nurabor of 
a relational object „hich object i-osseaoes **»»»— ft.-*(^,ftrrmBB properties de- 

peading on various detalls or components of the given State of thlnßs. An 
individual non-relational object containa an infinite multiplicitv of fetatesj 
of thin, involving only one subject, coalesced with one another by the same 
subject, slmilarly as is besides the case with the relationa as a peculiar 
o^.iect /subject pf properties/, 

5. Relations differ in peculiar moments of their constitutlve nature 
from the non-relational objects as well as in some properties /as syminetry, 
transitiveness, compositeness iüvolving more tiian one tbrm, and like/ whose 
matter is of such a kind that the non-relational objects cannot possess them 
And inversely, the non-relational objects possess soae properties whose mat- 
ter excludes theis appartenance to relations. ^at were the sense of saying, 
e.g. that a certain relation be ^reen or heawy or tnat it be gooü conductor 
of electricity. The question whether it be possible to detect a general law 
distinguishing all the non-relational properties /resp. contitutive natures 
from the relational ones, could be answered only by a material ontology. 
The exlstence of relative properties and of the moments of relative conti- 

ingarden 14 

JKXHxani tutlve natures /constltullng the Indlvldual objet»« as term 

of relations/ renders the pix5blem the more difflcult* Therefore we have to 
conten ourselves with examples* 

Roman ^ngarden 


Ths traditional dichotoüiic diviaion into '^re« 

lativa" and **absolute" features should be replaced by 

a division in/TO soveral fundamental types of features 

of \^ich only one would corraspond to what we shall 

determine heie finally as »'relative" featura/. It was 

simply not /realizedjproperly that various factors are 

^ ^ stinction 

Wve>l\r'^^here.. engaged, which oausad tbat the division betv/een 

" relative" and^ "absolute" features wets- regarded as 
iz^its^u, »t^Ss w<.iUti,.^(^ maiiy-.3ide d 

dichotomie, boi ng actually ^invoatcd rdth many mQa ii li ^bgs, 
1 shall try here t o - mako a diatinotion botwocn: 

a) relative features, 

b) externally conditioned properties, 

c) acc^uired properties, and 

d) absolutely (i)wn)properties of individual objects, 
later we shall have to make still another distino- 

tion w ithin the properties of an individual ,object, 
namely to distinguiah between "essential"^^elonging 
to the essence) ari,d ^"inessential"y\^not belonging to 
the essence ^\/t5f the objeot. This distinotion must not 
be oonfounded v\/ith other distinotions which I shall 

endeavour to trace presently^ 


_ vtf. 


5?K RELaTIVE FEATURES. These are a group of feaif- 
l-ures which we met f ormerly while considering the form 

of the relation between individual objects, and which 
I called "exponents" of relation (in the present ex- 
Position und er l)'r'. \7e can distinguish in them tha 
f ollowing characteristic moments: 

a) Tha relative feature jr (|togv belonp:s to the object 
D, but this belonging differs f rom that of features 
of other type , in the first place by being derived 

1) The relation R may be sin^le- many ; then 

we hoTQ to do not with a Single P' , but with many 
various P» , P" , P' » ',.. .P. 



from the relation R occurring betvveen ob je et ^ and 

objeot B' ^ ^ and indireotly from l^)GGrtain properties 

of object- 9 and 2°) oertain properties of object B* , 

which jointly form the :^ndamentum relatiorjis R, - 

Secondly: '/7hen a featuxe belongs to an object we may 

discern two moments: a) the object is deflned, "featur- 

ed" with some matter, b) what in philosophical tradi- 

tion was labellßd as ''inlierence" , i.e. the "aitidance*' 

of a feature in the subject of property or, on the 

contrary, its "resulting*' from this sabject. And 

both a) and b) tifpÖ^ in their relative feature charaoter- 

istically difTerÄrvt from what they afe when "absolute '^ 

properties belong to an object ./^he relative feature 

^W def Ines the objeot D to which «te belon^js, but 

it "does" it - if we may say so - not directly . It 

defines namely D not for its elf , but D "because of** 

©' and R, thus taking into consideration the occur- 

rence of R and the existence of D* with a certain ^j-, 

^-^thou^h f inally T' 
(partial) fundamentum relationis , Purtherr^ C.^,^^ "abides»', 

''is 1 ounded upon" 9, but just because it is a derivat- 
ive in respect to R and ©• , iia the foundation for 
its existence lies partially beyond 0. Therefore, 
once R ceases to occur (because e.g. B* ceased to 
exist, or at least lost the property which had served 
for fundamentum relationis), the relative feature 
will disappear ipso facto, although nothing besides 
this has changed in B: the endowment alone in © (its 
nature ani the rast of its properties, i.e^/Tor'öi/ ^Zvö^l 
in the widest meaning) as basis does not suffice 
to make J*^ belong to the object B. 

b) The matter of a relative feature is formed 
by a "relational moment" which contains a correspond- 
ent to ©' , and, at the same time - if we may use the- 


expression - tha mode of behaviour 

• • • • 

(beins so and so) of the object B in respect to ß' 

(that it is, for instance, just ^^ lesser than ^ and 
that than a certain B' ) . By the sana 4"^ somohov^r ' 
^'expresses** tha relation R between © and B' , is its 
^*exponent". This relational moment is not, therefore, 
a simply quality such as e.g. sensual qualities, like 
for instance "red" or "sonorous" or "srnooth" or "fr^^-r^ 
^r-ant" (e.g. "violet-soented" ) , although it is specific 
and, if we may say so, "qualitative" (having to do 
with "Contents", with "matter"), One could assume 
that it does not add anything new, no new, positive 
autonoraic material whioh would be embodied in 

the object 1^, nothing "real". It is vexy hard, and 

perhapß evan impossible to express this peculiar charac- 

ter of the matter of relative feature, but ihis is 

precisely the reason whi^rh c.ruii^Qs -jdityt - as we shall 

shortly see - we cai hardly attribute to relative 


features exactly the samei vifjty of existence as to all 
the remaining features of individual objects. Here 
we could easily assume that relative features are 


purely inten tional creations and that consequently 
thßir matter is not immanently contained, embodied 
in the object possessing the given relative feature. 
It seems to me, hov^ever, that this assumption is not 
right , in any case at least as far as relative features 
of autonomic or leal objects are concerned. It is only 
that th3 peculiar type of the matter which endows the 
relative feature is of a kind.not allov/ing such complete 
"realization" , "erabodimont" in the object like it is 

1) It is just in this light that the subject appearod 
^ *^ G2£^rrtlnin>y 

to me when I was ^ySteDrassctStk relative fejatures in 

Essentiale Fragen where I 


Quasi -Merkmale" (l.c, Kpt.Vl). 

call A he m "relative 



possibls in thö oase of real features (properties) , 
All those '♦similar to^ , "iifferent from", "consistent 
with»^, »^big^r than»», '^left»', "ri-ht", "lower»», »»upperr»^ 
eto., although being consyliod upon the basis of "roal** 
properties, seem themselves deprived of such fulness 
of reality, At overy place where for any reason the 
^relational moment** of a relative feature begins to 
acquire tb3 character of a real property interv/oven 
into real processes taking plaoe in the object itself 
and its environment, the relative feature of the dis- 
cussed type is somehav transformed into a real property 
of the object, v/hile its appearance may possibly boGone 
a reason for further alterations in the objeot or its 
environment. Let us imagine that \ve have two phy^ical 
ob^eots looated side by side in space, the formor '^on 
the righf' of the latter, the latter '♦on the leff* of 
the fonner. If v/e adopt the standpoint that these 
objeots are in an empty absolute space in whioh no 
''field" of forces is xysx spreading, that is e.g. no 
magnetic or electric or gravitational field, then such 
"righf or ^left" will be a relative feature in the 
tneaning nov/ discussed, i.e. a feature of the same kind 
as e.g. ^similar", '♦dissimilar^, etc. When, however, 
we assunia that these t^o bodies are looated in a gravi- 
tational field, such ^right»» or ^left^ will acquire 
the character of ä certain real property affecting 
other properties of the bodies in questicn: thpn it 
will bQ no me-re indifferent whether the body is located 
on the rirht or on the left, for this results or at 

least may result in real effects in the fonr. of real 
propertier^ of the bodies in question or in the alter- 
ations o:^ these properties. In the same way a differ- 
ent spacial System of atoms in a sugar molecule (in 
tha so-called "right-sided** or '*left-sided^ sugars) 

results in different optical properties in sagar 

. -5- 

eo ipi 

a certain relative feuture in tha nowi^disoussed maan- 
in^, >«f becomes one of the faniurnental "absolutely 
ovvn'' properticc of the givon subütance. 

This peculiar character of tha matter of a relat- 
ive feature has also its epistemological conseq^uence: 
Namely a relative featiire cannot "be simply perc eivad 
fparticularly ^ perceivej sensually) '.vhen our atten- 
tion is exclusivaly focased.and ixm restricted to the 
object to whioh the given relative feature lielongs, 
"but it must be u nderstood upob the basis of perceiving 
the object © while takins into ccaicideration R and D'i. 
This, however, does not exclude the possibility of 
certÄin secondary Visual phenomena being forme d which 
would characterize the object possessin^ some rel-'tive 
feature (e.^^ the phenomenon '^icamense" etc.), "but 
thiy thems^lvcG are not relative featuren and they 

alone are not enough to maice us un vier st and a relative 

The/- ion.^ the tion^_Qfy 

feature. i^ detect/^änd ix recogni^^^^-^ relative feat- 

ure macxux in any case a complex cornitive action 
clearly differing from a simple pereeption of things 
in certain properties» 

Both the peculiar form and the relational matter 
of the relative feature 'C,^.^ ^^ ^ manifestation (ovid- 
ence) of the fact of its being a specific effect of 
the existence of ©, B^ ^no. R and the re^ultant of their 
qualif ications . 0:i±ri^ to this c) the modus of existen- 
ce of a relative feature as of an autonomic derivative 
is not tto same as the mode of existence of other 
features (properti-^s) of the object ©, althou^h Ajpc 
owinö* to the participation of the relative feature 


in the 



of the object P it is in nome 

degree adapted in its mode of existenoe to the mode 
of existence of the whoH^ object to which it belongs. 
Its existence seems /levertheless to be ^'weaker" than 
the unrelational existence of the object ^ itself^ 
This is manifested among others in the already pre- 
viously ätated ^^inactivity*^ of the relative f eatixre, 
which alone cannot constitute a JP«ni«^ for any effoct* 

This causative function is , as it were, täten over 
by the actual occarrence of ovsrythin^; which Stands 
f or t he f und a^n tum re lat ionis R , i.e. oi the given 
relative feature as well. The relative feature is ~ 

as results from oux* discussion - certainly conditioned 
in its origination and subsistence within the object © 
by something lying beyond B. It is thorefore not sur- 
prisina' that it was frequently thought that vi og^^^ i ^rs a 
also was true, i.e. in every caso whoie such oondition- 
ing took place we had ipso_faojjo to uo v;ith a relative 
feature. This assumption, ^ö^^Sg^5>i ^^P"^ tißJit. Let 
US examine now the "f eatures»' \thus conditioned and 


re not relative features in the meaning determined 


^ PR0P^RTI2:S 


here to such properties as e.g, the *'shape^ of water 

contained in a drinking glass. The v;ater will preserve 

such shape only as long as it remains in the glass 

and as long as gravi ty is directed towards the bottom 

of the glass. In other cases the v/ater would ''spill" 

and ?5overflav", i.e» would assume quite a different 

shape, again determined by its now "container'' 4 in 

the widest meaning of the word)T The same applies to 


the "shape^ assiimed "by gases fillin^ a given artifi- 
cial Container» A slightly more complex exaraple ±s 
provided by the shape of a balö)on made of fine silk, 
the shape namely assumed by the baloon when it is under 
a strong tension (pressure) filled with gas. In such 
cases the baloon has a certain ^cut" of its ovm and 
it gyn dimens ions (size): it laay, ha/vever, assume 

various shapes according to the degree o f b e ing filled 
jjtp- with gas» ^Ft-4s-^^^i;k^ when the gas f illing^ it ^;ip^ 
has a sufficiently high tension that-^rt-gf^ Ü b e^ able 
to assume the shape which iß '^proper'* to it. Otherv^ise 
the foroe of gravity on one hand, and tte baloon* s 
insufficient tans^iies^s- on the other, will not allow it 
to swell to the required extent. Eaoh of the shapes 
assuined by the baloon is a resultant of the Joint in« 
f luence of its properties j^sd^those of the gas and 
the gravi tational field in which both baloon and gas 
are placed: this ** proper" shape, however, as shape 

is the baloon' s cMn shape, ani only its effectiva 
assumin^ is conditioned by its non-spacial propertias 
(as, for instance, a certain "softness**, flexibility 


and expansibility of the rubber or silk), and, on the 

other band, by properties belonging to objects other 
than itself (gas expansivity, the gravitaitlonaL field). 
Finally, still another exaaple very akin to that of 
the shape of water in a glass, Jet relating not to 
the properties of objects, but to the properties of 
a process, is provided by the movement of a train 
on its rails: the shape of tha '•way" of such movement 
is not exclusively "own and proper" for the course of 
the train, for it is adapted to tha shape of tl^ rail- 
way upon which the rain is moving. Ihe movement of 


th0 train merely »»assuiiBs" it - just ;Lafe watar »^as- 

sumew^»' thö slape of the glass into which it is poured. 

In Order to avoid af mistaken supposition that tt=i^ 

solQly the spa^'lal shape titd^may s-fcandrTför such an 

extemally conditioned property we may rofer to a 

phenomenon well kno^yn 

fact xx±irx:wkiEfax3C3[xiiacvs^nnaf± in chemstry: A ^riven 

chtoical substonce a together with another substance b 
f orms a cheinical ooinbination but only if it is mixed 
in some Wc^y or another with a third substance c, the 
latter acting as ^catalyst" while staying outside the 
naw3y created chemical combination. In such cases the 
property of Joining with some other substance is con- 
ditioned by the prosance of the catalyst, 

What 'aJe"|then^ the characteristics of such propertie 
of individual objects ? In the first place they bolon^:!: 
to the object, but this belonging isyf^ derivative from 
the occurronce of a 

connoction) between 


/a\ (rdi'i^ 



the given object and another object 0* (or other 
objeots - as e.g. in the discussod cases: the glass 
containing the water, the earth and other attracting 
bodies). This derivation concerns both the ori::inatinp: 
of a property - v;hich in the examined case consists 
in the water possessing a certain shape - and the für th er 
c ontinuation of its belog^in^ ^ KfM preservation ^ - r' i -h'- -a. 
Qxiafcnce , alongside of other proper tios of the given 
object. Besides, this derivation is of ^^ir-^-fti v^ nature: 
the fact of the given proporty belonjing to an object 
is the ef fect of the occurronce of a certain connection 
b^irvveen the given ob je et and other objüots;^: In cur case: 
tho cause for the water assuming just such shape lies 
in it^having being poured jijst in such an amount into 
a glass just so placed in space in respect to the earth 

and having just such a shapo . The water lias adapted it>.ol f 


vTith its ühape to the shape of the glass, The condition- 
ing of tho belonsincir of this property reaches so f ar 

that tte water could not by itsolf as^sume the shape 

it possesses, or possess it xitki2ß!ifc:±±i3:xpr2XSHKBxx)f 

a glass of the given shape existß anC i^ located in 
spaoe just so as to make the force of gravity operate 
just in the required direction and, finally, unless 
th3re^>^thö earth and other v;ater-attracting Jbodies . 
The free movabilit ^y of water molecules makes ^^^unahle 
to possess a shape ^of its own»^ , wiiirfe" it can assume 
any shape conferrod upon it by the " Container" in 
which it is placed and, if there are no impediirents 
present (e.:;, such as capillc^ry vess-c^ls) it is always 
"on a level plane". Thus its actual shape is the result 
of a common effeot of certain properties of water and 
of certain p-'operties of other objscts to which water 
is "contiguous". This "contiguity" is a form of the 
connection which among others/^öccuiaing between the 
water and the contalnsr. This contiguity must be 
achieved if the given shape is to belong to the given 
water. The erAstence alone o f the given quantity of 
weiter o.nd of the given glass and of attracting bodies 
is not enough (as it was the ca-jfj when relative, featur- 
es were concerned), but the water must be poured into 
the p-lass. and the glass confer upon it "its otJn" shape 
opposing its stxf fno &a to water pressure. Once the 
contiguity of water to the sides of the -lass ceases 
for any reason whatever, the water will lose this 

1) Hersc^i» "contiguity" is taken literally, But a 
wider (more gener al) meaning of the word mijit be 
oreated where "contiguity" would mean that two 

objects directly react with their respective pro- 
perties upon each other. 


^hiÄy^ (will flow out), so looüely S^töjis^connectad 

-viith other Wctter propertias which only allow for it 

^acquiring this sbups, jbain^l not )suf ficie nt to m«ke 
Jr^belong to Wotter. One of the most essenüal moments 
in the difference between relative features and ex- 
ternally conditioned properties lies nagiaiy in the 
faot, that_ijCL the case of the former it is enough 
that the .relationj substrataj' merely exist and that no 

i nteraction or uny otter ani-tr&*Sr9ffir« conne 


ctioriv is neces- 

saiy between thern, while in the case of the latter 
such an interaction is indispensable» In the former 
cases, one mir^ht say, features result from the endow- 
ment of the fundamentum relationis, while in the latter 
they mu3t be actually crt^ated with soüb action or 
reaction of external elements exercised upon the _:iven 
object vvhich is to poseess some property extemally 
conditioned and v^hose reaction consists in the affect- 
ive assumin^ of the given property. But , on the other 
hand, this property hcts a stronger autonomy than the 
relative feature» It is onqof the real properties of 
an object (it may appear J>«rt^>'v;ith such real objects, 
since ideal objects cunnot possess any externally 
conditioned prope2rties) . Its belonjing to the object 
is not only the ef fect xf brou-^t about by a cause, 
but also itselT is or may be a cause (or one of the 
causes or, more accurately, an ac Company in g condition) 
for some real effects: e.g» the shape assumed by 

the sup e rf ic4aa of water causes a partial reflection 

of lijht rays in a determined way; ±]a change in the 

shape will result in a change in light reflection or 

Penetration, If e^g. we pulverize .voiter into spray, 

then the light rays will pene träte but in an insijnif- 

icant degree, if at all, this minutely sprayed watör. 


etc . etc. On the other band, however, the matter of 
extemally conclitioned properties is not a relational 
ffioment which would contain a correspondent to some 
other oTDject. Nor can it be "understood" in this way, 
as ^^^ijf is the case vTith relative features^ It is true, 
however, that its matter is usually adapted to proper- 
ties of erternal objects which are conüitioning its 

belongin^. To xi positive (convex) - if we may say so - 

shape of the water in a glass corresponds the negative 

(concave) shape of the glass itself . The shape of a 

gas ^ 

p a^tially filled "baloon is a resultant of other spa^ial 

and material properties of the baloon itself and of 

external conditions ^j^ v;hich the baloon is placed; 

a ''resultant", i.e, a property of an indirect quality 

bilaterally conditioned. Otherwise, however, than^>^ 

was the case with cor relative relative features, this 

is xio ^'intelligible" Subordination (^'bigger than'' 

corresponding to ''smaller tlian, etcOt ^^"^ merely a 

real adaptation > 

Ht^^ AGQUIR21D PROPERTIES. Akin to externally condi- 
tioned properties are the acquired properties of real 
objects: they also must be causatively produced by 
some external factorj but, once they are produced, 
they will be long to the object, althou^ the external 
factor which Jo^id^produced them^ceased to exist. Thus 
they^are OJ^ttÄily unable to exist in ideal objects, 
which, as we know, cannot be causatively interrelated . 
If e»g^ a sculptor^confersr on a piece of marble a 
certain bhape, then he must hamriBr it out, i.e^^do 
a number of actions, cremte a number of canditions 
which wCÄtlä servö as^cause or causes for the marble 
assuming eventually such and such^real shape. The 



possession of susrh shape is an property acquired by tha 

marble ,As for other oxumploa e i acquired properties, they 

.u^ee e.ßv those properties of a broth which malcB it diiier 

f rorn substances which have jointly served to produce it 

thrS^h a oookin,7 process, so as to obtain f rom v;ater, 

vegetables kmd. raw meat tha substance which we call '^broth*'. 

Acquired properties differ from the previously discussed 

properties for, althou^h they are also externally condi- 

is needed for 

tioned, this ccnditioning KSiiaGCKns: solely the ori.^inatin,^ 

of a property with detarmined matters, but it is no more 
neoessary to preserve this property, A sh^pe once conferred 
upon a piece of marble. stays on , - a lthou^-h the action which 
^J;i^ produce d it, has stopped. Moreover, it even had to 
stop, if the givan shape was to be conferred; further 
action would have changed it into anothar shipe, This 
rosults from the fact that there is a different, viz, a 
much closer, connection between an acquired property and 
all other properties of an ob je et than between an exter- 
nally conditioned property and such other properties: 
the acquired property is of such a (platte ^ that its belong- 
ing to the object, once it has been created, is sufficient- 
ly conditioned by tte remainine: properties of the ob je ct. 
In particular, as far as t^iß shape proper of "solid" 
bodi3S is concerned, the molecular structure and inter- 
relation in space as well as the System of forces actin^ 


between molecules Cnable such^bodiö^ not only to preserve 
"its own" shape, but even^-fesist other bodies acting 
upon it to alter its shape althou-h, of courso, this 
capacity of resistance is not unrestricted . Thus this 
f!own" shape of a bodyfönly^rQ^g^^ / stays/ unchanged for 
a certain period of tine , generally it varies within 
some limits, according e.^. to bodily terr.perature and 



outside tempsrature. But, nevetheless, it does not re- 
quire any "supporf* from external bodiös - as^ v;as the 
case with the shape of wate r in a glass -^ t is even^ 

one of the agents in the @aG^tions exercised 
by thö i^lVQYi body on surrounding bodies. Acquired pro- 
perties are not all of the same durability. Some show 
a greater, some a lesser resistance to external influen- 
ces some are close/^, some more loosely oonnectea witn 

the rema ininp properties of the ob je ct. More detailed 

particulars of all these possible cases are ±ha object 

of research for natural sciences which try to determine 

"laws" of a greater or lesser prscision, ocourring more 

or less rigorously, Tt is just with those acquired pro- 

pertiösrone raay see with particular clarity that their 

/matters^do not represent correlativs relational momenti 

which could be "understood" , but certain nualities whose 

appearance in cxi ob je et under the influonce of an action 

exercised by sorae external agents must be detected by 

empirical, and usaally by experimental methods:it must 

be checked vvlat will happen when an object with definite 

properties is acted upon in a definite way, when it is 

placed in definite external conditions: will they produce 

any new properties in the object and, if any, wha t will 

thev beT Hare the very occurronce of the object's 

uction ttpon external «ction is essential^ xIäics it sign- 


ifies: first,that the object already j^ossessed certain 
(com.paratively) durah le properties, since it could in 
some way "reply" to the uction exercised upon it; and 
secondly, that/tTHquiricb »^nder the influenae of external 

agents some new properties, it keeps thex^ yC althou^h 


extornal conditions have ceased their action: they hav^ 

been rsplaced by othors 'vvhich do not affect tlx) given 

acquired properties of the object. Thas these properties 

are more than merely preseirved by the rerriaining propert- 

ies of the object: they appear as relativ ely indepen dent 

of external agents ; "relative ly independenf means indep- 

endent in respect :tcr some selected actions and propert- 

ies of external objeots, und not in reppect 15^ all of them 

boundary line 
To find the i±m±tx of independence of a certain property 

and to deteot what external agents produce some definite 

changes in it is a task set :^ fore the empirical sclenc- 

es, This j^dependenoe of acquired properties from selected 

external sigents provides perhaps the best evidance that 

they are the ob je et 's ovm properties, belonrjing to its 

own rainge of autonomy, althougji they b*ye been producad 

Y/ith the help of such external agents, This is just 

What raalces them differ from extern^^lly conditioned 

properties whioh are merely "put on" by the object 

like a garment put on according to the occasion. 

?(^ ^BSOLITT^LY OXT PBDPZRTIES. There remainö still 
the last property group which I called ^Äbsolutaly ov;n" . 
These are properties which neither in their origin nor 
in their further belon.r:irig to the ob je et are in any v : ay 
conditioned by any external agents. They can be consi- 
dered in a double aspect: either 4fe>y- radically or 
moderately. In the former case we may speak of abso- 
lutely own properties only as far as • individual cbjeciB 
are concerned, for such an ob je et is autonomically 
p r Imayy* . being thus not only "eternal" but also of 
such nature that absolutely o\vn properties (or otherwise: 
at least some of its properties) were not created by 
any agent outside it. Por even if we assumed that the 


given object had originatad at a certain moment, then, 
since it seems unlilcely that anything could originate 
out of nothing, we would have to admit that sohiöj extemal 
agents v;ere the condition both indispensable and suf fi- 
elen t for tho ori.^inatin.^ of tho .^ivon object^s complox 
of properties and that, th3refore, at bast its properties 
v;ould be properties acquired at the very momont of or.^x- 
nating of the object itself . But atasosst it does not seem 
imposßible that there might exist (at least) two eternal 
objeots whiohmutuallyXwou^ the belonjing of 

some ot allültheir properties; therefore, if any object 
is to possess absolutely own properties in the radical 
' moanin£;,c c1^^meansJ:)4arü that it must be autonomically 

primary itself • Its absolutely own properties form then, 
or at least belong to, the final autonomio foundation of 
all the objects derived from it j^nä of their properties, 
be they acquired or externally conditioned, 'Jhile pus- 
sing no judgment now , \^hether such an object exist s or 
not, we must state that only such object is capable of 
possessing absolutely own pioperties in the rudical 
maaning; und^ moreover, its exiptence v/ould require that 
a certodn amount of such pioperties would serve for 
its foundation. But absolutely ovm properties may be 
also examined in thair w ekker. moderate moaning . In this 
lattQr case the assumption that an object possessed of 
Such properties oui i ^ht to be autonomically prim.ary is not 
necessary. But in such cases the problem of such propar- 
ties is closoly connected v;ith the question of essential 
properties, i.e. with the question of the essence of an 
indiviaUiil object. ^n absolutely ovm property in iti 
moderate ißaaning would be otao h a property v^dair^h-VinGÄ 
the very first moment of the object's existence belon^^ 
to it and ^ not ccnditionod by any extemal a^ent; 

it. form^ at least part of the autonoinic basis for all 

tlB othör properti 

iven ob je et, i.e. JDiaida f^r 

acquired proper ti es ^!s(£ Tor externally conditioned ones 
and, finally, for relative features. Ov^ing to such liiri 1i - 
»tion we vvould lef aside the as3imption that possibly 
the whole oi the object was created by t>ß interference 
of some external a^ent, «*nd that üklso its properties 
constituting the final autonomic bacis for its remain- 
in^ properties or features were then created, and that 
±kii33 conseq.aently al^o these properties possibly vvould 
-not be ubsolutely ovai in the radioal meanin^^^ We would 
höre adopt the stand point that an object may possess 
properties conditioned or unoonditionod by external 
agents^but from the^moinent of its actual existence • 
And it cannot exist unless it has been constituted by 
a certÄin n-iture. If it - .-/»y!? t o. have some absolutely 
own pioperties (in the moderate meanin^^), it o ould 
fe^pp^^nrat- ix the y^ in their matter^ vv ould bo postulated 
by the nature of the object-^^ either as properties 
already doveloped and formed, or as- pr operties 
7;hioh *Are only gain^ to de\relop from their first g^rm. 
It dep^nds on the nature of the object which of the 



already f uLly_f ormedw or is gradually reuohinr its 

füll ^^itWisirwi. In other v;ords: the matter of th^se 


1) Tt is quite 8§R2M that no object j^fxxHy natura^ 

v5dtati29cra:K could exist unless it possessed, besides its 
nature, sorr.ö properties (features). What we ou^t 
to resolvQ is, whüther the nature of an object must 
always - whatever it is lilce - determine a certain 
seleotion of aboolutely own properties. This is one 
of the oential problems relatin-:: to the essence of 
an objecto I will examine it L^ter. 




propjrties, whether they üre in their initi**l st*4^3 or 
in füll development, v/ould höiva to provide & necossary 
qualitative complet ion tjar the obJ3ct*3 c C3nst itutive natura, 
a completion whioh woald not require ciny m-itarial momont 
oo-existant within ths objact in question, other than 
a momönt v/hich itoalf eithor constitutes the nature of the 
objeot, or eise determines materially somö other absolutc^ly 
own property of the objoct in >^ woderate Tfrearrtrn^^ -tibso- 

lutely avn properties of the object are in this case, ther 

foreV connex in bcin^ in respeot to the nature of the ob- 

JGct and sometimes in respeot to its other absolut ely own 

properties, and, at the sane time, (relatively) dist i not " 

and independent in beine, both from the remaining proper- 

"^ies, jbf any, of the same object as well as from anything 

existin^ beyond it. And vioe versa: the object's nature 

wäiuld be in such cases oonnex in its matter in respeot 

to itdthe matter of absolute ly ov/n properties belongin^^ to 

the object constituted by it. V/hile lorbearinj to decide 

whether such natures of objects are possible or not ,änd 

v^hat fshould Itheyibe li^ce to allow for the realisation of 
so close a conneotion between ttemselves and some proper- 
ties of tte object in question - such structure of tte 
ob je et should be carefully examined. For then one may 
suppose th^t absolutely own properties (in the moderate 
meanin;^) oonstitute^ toge ther with the object 's natura, 
this somethinc: whioh we desi^^•nate as its essence , This 
essence of the object at the same time v/ ould ccnstitu*e - 
- other individifcil ob je et s, interrelated ^ni interconnec- 
ted with it axistinj simult-neously - together with the 
essences of such other objects the final :ÄUtonomic basis 
for the possession by the object of all the remainin^ 
properties: i.e. acquired properties^ exte mally condi- 
1) I.e. acquired, oxte mally conaitioned properties etc. 



tionad propartiss and relative feutures. This would 

provide "tha final oore upon/fte remainder of the object 

is built and which settles not morely th3 objaot's 

existsnce bat, moreover, that amon<^ a multitude of 

oo-exi Stent individual objaots this very objeot is a 

sopj^rate elemant , introduoing its avn yriajsx peculiar 

accent into the sum of objects b0lon^;:i^2; to a particular 

domain. V/e shall abstain here from a final jud^ent, 

whether such an interpretation of the objeot's essenoe 

is j u^^ and whether each individual object mus t possess 

and may possess its essence or absolut ely o'm proper- 

ties (at least in tiis:id: modo rat e . mea nin^ ) , This we 

shall be able to resolvs but when we penetrate deeper 

into the essen^o of an individual ob je ct. At present 

we must proceed to givi^^' more detailed particulars 

o:^ the absolut ely own property in both its distinguished 
meanings, in order to emphasize its differenoe, in all 
the resj^cts stated ahove, from other properties or 
feutures of an individual object. 

Its belonjin^' to an ob je et is "absolute *\ which 
means it has no autonomic basis in a nythinj;: eise be- 
sides the subject of property to which it belongs. This 
belon!p.n5^ is also, at least when essential properties 
are coicerned, in a spe c if ic v;ay indiosoluble ^ for its 
annihilation must be accompanied with the destruction 
of the obj3ct itself , of its constitutive nc^ture in 
particular^ This does not rnean, h6wever, that an abso- 
lutely ovn property should be cornpletely unchangeable 
in its matter. ^Iready in my previouüly made analysis 
of objecto lasting in time (Äf or^^anisrns in particular) 
I called the reader's attention to the followlng possibi- 
lity: it may happen that a certain ^uality is bein^ 
formed, within the object's development, with ^rowin^ 


pärfection i*nd fulness, th^t it is t^icing r.hape more and 
more perf 3ctly until it attain s a certain optimum whioh 
it either will pressrvs, or eise will lose ^ *fc^ain, as 
a consequence of the objact ^rudually "grwing old" anl 
its senile atropl^ . Such ohanges connected with the 
mode of appearance i^nd with the stages of development or 
maturity of a quulity, wbioh form the matter of absolu- 
tely om properties and of the object's constitutiva 
nature, are - if they appear at all - inte rdep enden t 
chan^ses and possess a certain autonomic re^'ular course. 
This regulär course may be disturbed by external inf lu- 
ences, its main line, however, is traced charocte ris tic- 
«illy throughout the object's Wtfödäiä^ and provides one 
more evidence of the »^ absolute ness" , and consequently 
of the distinctness with which the absolute ly own pro- 
perties* complex belongs to the objeot, 

^Jhen we are speakin^ here of the ^indissolubility" 
or of the »'independence^ of -tbsolutely o^m «4nd essential 
properties, those negative denominations serve only as 
means for drawing attention to a certain positive char- 
itcter of the mode of their belonoing to the object, 
which mode/Is extrenßly difficult to express in its 
positive aspect. But it is certain that it is just 
this XDEiy positive character which determines the ex- 

ceptional position of the discussed properties in an 
ob je ct. this v^5y^ character expresses this peculiar 

comDactness which appears amon^- ubsolutely own proper- 
ties in respect to one another, and also between them 
and the object' s constitutive nature* The orijin of 
this compactness must be certainly loolced for in the 
material endavment of the properties concemed -ind of 
the ne^tture of tho ob je et, This was just what we meant 
when we were speaking at the beginnin^_ of the present 

volume of "essential anity'*, and in some cuses of "funotion- 


ä1 unity" as well. This compactness is of such a Icind 
that it oan ba annihilated bat by the destruction of the 
Y^hole objoct, if the latter is possible.. ror there arises 
the 4,aesiuion vmeiiher, when we are dealin^ v;ith absolutely 
own propjrties takea radicall y, i.e» when un ob je et is 

primary in bein^, such absolutely own properties, besides 

bein^; inaissoluble in the above examined meanin^, possibly 

could nibt ever be destroyed by any extemal influences. 

Perhaps an objeot primary in being cannot be affectad by 

any extemal influenoes which in some way or another 

would result in the ohiunge of its absolute ly ov^ proper- 

ties. An object primary in being v;ould surpass all 

other obJGcts by its absolute independence of them, at 

least in its essence. j^^ä. if even it could acquire some 

properties dependent on soniething other than itself , 

it would have been relative featui*es only^ This would 

have meant but that absolutely owri properties taken ra- 

dically would have had their condition v\iiolly sufficient 

in the ob je et 's natuiB, while this nature must have been 

so materially endowed that it could not be non-exi Stent., 

1 will leave this problem (i.e, whether such ideal 

qualities are possible^,^-j^vteöJi could serve as nature for 

obJQctslj ^n the strictest j neaning ^r Imxry in bein^) un- 

solved^ I have referred to it but to present an e:rtremal 

optimal cuse of the object's »absolutely ovm properties 

and to State that such a case do es not seem im.possible. 

Its actual ocourrence or non-occurrence mi^h t be resolved 

but in a metiüphysical discussion, 2xDcan ontolo^rical 

Änalysis may yxid should consider the possibilit y of a 
connection betv\<een the object's properties und its nature 
as close as that which exlsts within the ob je et» s 
essence, I shall do it now« 

/ ,■ 

ir a. icuCt -5. i- ;K 


./of f:'riOther faot X' -uhio.. VKjmois.v. iherÄby 

Xo ..rv'7--- thi 



nw II i n MW I ai I » 


r '^ of 

r »Fi of ']VOh 

«a80'.5» Ji i 

(I. ,thf»n 

it :ri^„ . 1)7 ';h<? ön n thf;t cornr^ othüi ^,iCt of ' 'v -so K^nna Gr, 

13 aow hf: 

tu« ^d\^:'.. (i , 

-^? "b-at. ■;;be « ffoct, of JtüE-^ip^Lä^ixfV, 

^'hi^^h In l^a tarn b«0QiA^ 


<. » 

• ^ V v><n .•> 

th?ij i,#o . dih;i 'r o" 1 <f^^nt^ratior is in cae 

in^ 1 the c^are of 

tha ij\c j .'.on rm ! of tbe oontinuing iUwW üf t jtrlo onrr^nt 

in a oart in crnd'^ctor^ In. enother oei^^^uo^mviiT ^ th** '3lcctrio 
c* .: it f < -^ ■; i. i.h t oindnxtcr Is thä o . cf ' Hf^ ;0t5cn of %hun th: '8 moutJiönad firoli, iM individiiaiJ.-' dif .^«ront 

• V Uli b 

.1 U 

■:.■■■': t ♦• 

l -'»rj^ to the öjjLioe geiva^ ü- 

: In ^Jif* firnt c^^e. 


I. ■ ' * ■ ♦ » . 


..coor<3inp to th<? usual 0|jini 

jat the cMtsal relrtion 


;« \ (. 

ccn^ "^ f. >*hrpte oca:idör aa w;.u g^rcurd of *.lie ^^operlJ^^? of 

1 v.-v^lon r:tate6 ^b<ivö ±ä t.ic oirc^. 

(iv,e thnt every 


c_^ dj» Ita efffiot". and ^^aiit ..x e in not r^i^or^iblö. Thnre 
no löoi: of t'icorotioianö^ho'vovfirsp !jo ^v* 1. ' Itif^^ to aBsnme 
raversibilit:y of timt? ni:«^ b,v ti*6 ee^iic toion of the teraporiil 

ata fr;.) r.ut on the otber hvxxä it i; doubtfnl v/hother the 

i '""'^ -•-"•■' o' thfii tho cnuae pr6caie;a it3 (iuinv.vxj ,j.tu ^ offeot 

is tonabie. Ac again t thia w# ahnli trj to 

) — ■) 

th t th^ slmiil- 

tantf^ T&m«ef of fnots whloh ars in an inmodiato oausal ont»o oon- 
Tiftotion ma.vt be maintiined.ys») Tho grouud of ilie aon-rt v'er«ibllity 




of th. reutio. on...n oa«. and e«ec. do,. not ii, i„ th, 
iffimal dUtano. ,o...„ .,. ,.„ ,„, ,, ,,. ^^,, ^^^^ ^ 
aoo<,«=pxu!„3 a piooa « „„i »n lu a«„t .hi,„ ... .,, ' , ' 
7 dos. no. aoooapUah aud/«g«aot acoomoll » „„ , , 
..a.o. „„.,^, ^,, , „„,^^^ ^^, ^^^^^ ^^ ^^^^^ _^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ 

f.o.e ( .,,a„ aU.ou«. t.., .a, ..lo^ a. to .u.U for. w 

^^^^- '^^" '^'"''^ *^* o^i^' to Point to 

=.,t..^.taaoa ti>at So....i„, ^ ,„,,„, ^ ^^„^^ ^^ 

"othoyun, axtuo^ tuis ^oa. i. aot Tor ^S^^,- 
c .„oo„= a 0... 0. .0...,^ ^,., ,^^^^^, ^^^^ ^^^^^_^^ -^ '^ _ 

»"» B^iwc» Ol öonethlag as v sli 

^«'. ^uc .f tuat üoourrlng-in -real Bsing 

T**^^ proo66d Is 1,0 beoüuiö a oauü« of 

auoo.7.a orraot XU .. .,a^ 0, ,, ^„,,.,, „,„^ ^^ ^^^^^^ 

laoo.„x,t«n.a. (i.p...eoU„.; i.„ .a., «„tta, B,d„, 

-Uoa ,..„. a l.a. o. .,uux.»a..a dx.tdr„.„o, x„ t..„. 

^ .. B.X„, .,o^t Xnto a «tat. o. ^ ».,„u...„. „,„.„, ,„„.,,„ 

^0 ..X.t aa ..c..xt ....p., oa..„t a„aur» ch.a,.Xa„ .x..™t .ein, 

ääBifflSim b. .c..t.x,^- ex„c ,.Mo,, «u.d ..oon.txt.t. t,.. 

..uxxxorl» xn B,Xog. .u. aappl..,nt.tXon, tM.„cnt 

.f «-,....x..-x.. X« ■o.x.g t..„for. p„d«.d ,, ^„ inoo„pi,t. 

., «h. tun. in n..d o. auppZ.™ntatXon. .„d tK. tMn« t.aa ^.daa.d 

13 nothing ,1«,, th.tV.e efeot o th t 

■*-»— orr«ct lanrt, b- i- ♦ i, . ■■'«'"ciTiion, 

'econ.,titate th. o..xiIlvi„ . *-.', -rr.«^'*!^. lt. ,nd to 

to b« In r«rard^th. . '^'^^^' ^'^ i^'o^ed 

whioh la ,0 -.h.r ^ . »'•inglng-lnJ:o-3«l„g.. 

i« bj' no n...«n8 Idatlonl 7lth fch. "*"' ^^°^ 

in Bein, f .„ ..,,,,„, ^^^ ,^^^ • -^ ^^ -.uiu,.,,., 

PPeesinr, the 7-at,^Tatine, the Soothiu. m «.. 

'"irst Inaofar it de es nc^t ^ . ^ *^''® »'* 

ai.98 not hfirbor lt<«i# « 

P, „,„„„„„ „, ..„ . '■' "^ "«-«« «"= th. !„«,. 


penaabl. oondltlon or Ita oausa. ßut we ahoi 

Ali t ü u fjns not «A,,^-^ . ▼ariouä 

usücriv • ^^"** Pia«« it mu;,t b« Htref«*d th . . 
People hav«/in ml^ h,,« . , ^^«ßs^d th, t what 

where.. we .Aj^ ' """^" ^" ^^^«^^^^ --e 

■ ^^^' ir we *ry to olarif;? tha a.«. i 
.«.et ., th. ,.0.. In . / , -""»-'«« « W. «„ 



oauso Wf and to .his extenl. t.c ie the 

But Wh, U.i. is so i« s loeicrJ een.« v^hli« tbe m.terial(r.ale) 
r«3atiou.hlp se«-a to Dc Ju.t th« '^ppr-eite CT.e becsn.e It i. 
preoi..!, thv, O.U.. snfcrce« the «ffoot ( ead moro aocarat.l. ; 

, , T5 -.w r- ff^t ^pf-t which. iö the «ffect)- thlü 
1. ..« .a, .>.=^ntia Problem. '.U U U »o b,=au». tl>. oaa,. 

i»AM^ th* U lt. ontio ,oan.lo..Bt.tio« (Seinsargänzang) . 
^^ Cf t.« ...US« oan th.rerore .e w*^ M2- 
v,ith ful. oartaintj fro. tt., ncn^^exlstano« of tha effect. If the 
.ffeut weru not c.lUd inte e«iug ».. th. cruae es Ue neoessar, 
o...lo.entar, el.neot. th.n v. oouXd not utUlia it ae a losicall, 
iadiäten-uUe oondltion for deciding .he .xletenoe ^ 

It i. the ■'aca.e-;aont-. that whioh follo«a (neoes^ari^ ^ 
th« ^eiuc Ol- the ouas. but hj itself It m.t not ba • — 
,, ,h. faot tha. 1. its oan.o, it .ust not b« in naed of .o..Xe.a.t. 
.tio. t: i.. ann.e. Thar.for. It Is not a^o^o^allT 
^,,,,Un, ccdition of Ita oa..a. Hothing follcwa in a lo«loal 
.eusa froa its «xt.t.noe in ra..rd tc tha axistanca of a f.ot 
whiou ..ight «ventu.ll^ beoo«. If oaua. a» a r.eult of ita 
mat^rial latamlnatlon. ^o^aible " - ., , .. 

,„4 to th. f.ct th,t «tt. fo^. «M .«.«» .thla..o«v«.-ould 
o„.n.Utatc feU. ««-»!"«' "-« "/" t»^,.fl.t«. ^.,.a«ao. 


fnuded a«o«aaRr5 Toge -.herneBj. wlth Soraetliing rtlse witiilu -^j-^ 

and the s aiaa 'whol.e. whereaa th« two ikct immedintelj; vilth oactx 

other/oonneotei faotä whlch we oull "oauae" eud "effeof ir^y 

-it ifc trvxa- OQdxa In one and the öaia« objeot but b^? iio laoaua must 

do so; they may juat as well ba distribtited awoog tkjo dii_2I££^ 

objeot,a( for inatanoa mateyial thinea . ) A 3 .j ?aiiiherr.iora the tno 

terms of the oeusal relation ar« tKeiröeives bwo 4if£e£snt snfc- 

stantlalities (eventa or/prooeeae») and noi of-l^- tino Intcr- 

Aepeudent moments of one aubstantiaiit^ at iä the cuae lu ths 

event of a defloieat autonoB»^ of *eiü«, "Seuee" and "offeot" 

ar« not laoklng In ± M*±« autonoms of ^eing with resarä to eaoh 

other. But Is it perhap« Twrrtirt« admiBslble co talk ii^r-ä a^oat 

a mutual "dependenoe of **eing'<" Oatioali? de^^eadentj/^io) -re . 

ftooording to owr deteminatiorw namelji two outioally aitcnomoua 

substantialltiee that mat exiat aooording to tJhair aasonoo K±i 

■jUraltan«oualy, 0* to ext^reas it oegatlväly : if tha oae oannot 

exiat without the alniQltanaoii« exibtence of bu« othor, If thla 

oan be aaU of avor.7 one of tliQ %wo auba antialüi^s with ragard 

to the othei then we dealwith a xwxtxaX depsiidänce ouö the 

ontio yelationahlp ia in thia oaao ayatietriosil/inb it ieat.- that 

th*re mas be also oaa«« of uaiiatarai ontio dep^ndauo« where B 

oay be ontloally dependent ou A but A ia not oixtioai .y dapendant 

on B. The axmihilation or the aon-ociag of A eutailu the snnlhU- 

etion or the non-belng eg B bat aot vioa-varas . The ontio ro- 

latlonahlp ia in thia oaae aayncxetrioal. le thia not the op«« 

«kern two faot« are onkioaiiy reltitod in siioh a m\.j thet one ie 

the oaaae and the other uhe affeot? SeUvecn tlio t\to th«ro ai»o 

preralia aa aejnmetry in fleiu«, ia the eff-ot - in ita oaaenoe- 

i«tloally dependent on the oaxä«? It oannot orlginete witaout 

the origlnation »f the oouae -Mwely in the indiTida^ oaa« 



to the individttal f&ot that ia ita Immediate oause. 

But what äoea thla hang VL^tml ou th« asaeno« of tho faot that 

ha paixa to b« an effoct? C.rtnlnl;; ono« a faot &. haa beootne th« 

Of th:; f-ot, thea thla B -aa J«,^t this partloalar individoal - 

Cfüjnot ori^lnate ir an? other waj .naj It oould not originate at 

all i.f A hf.d not occarr««. But thla Impoöäibility eeeo» üo hang 

apon thn aiare iHÜ-ClM '»'id inäiTldnality of tue faot taat as the offoot of A and not apon Its oaaenoa . Ooald it 

•xaotli» " 

not .mr-pen Inde«! that amwan?*«*«*» «qual f »tjhe aame" ) faoi: 

B> eculd orli^inat. p«t of ^n «atlrely differeat /^^l^d-xiöre^t 

as to lta.riHtgrtni .ajafnoa - ? w» often aohloTe" tiie samo ' 
rePTiit - thnt l.- a matcrially^jual reaiilt - vrtth oai^ir^lrv dlfforent 
aeain, do wo not ? It 80«ms therefore that the effoot ia not 
ontloali;. do^endent on tho oauae». It also often happeri« that 
afSar th« oriapinatiOTf of m faot .for instanoe a procöös »froni 
a oa«3«, th« lottir oeasee to axlst ^jithout iwtiiBÄ^iu tiic 

leaat the contlnued exlatenoa of the aff.ot. It U also for that 
reaeoa th^t the effect oannot be ontioally dependent on the caaa«. 
9at la prrhnpa- on the oontrary-tfi« oanae ontioally ufependüut on 
ite inur*dlote off.ct? Those who hold that the uauüa ptcoedes 
its>aaiB,te sffeot might ba perhpps inoUned to objöot .^ith 
thP arj-ument that the cana« ooolä not be ou«;ioaliy dependent 
on (Oitethlng wbioh aa yet doaa not «xiat whii« the uau^e ia 
nlready thnr«. Bnt tha praoodanca of the oaaae iü relutioa to 
ita !if.f«(5t la true only of tha indiraot o&aaas of aa ef-ct 
-BS wt shall prasootly 8tt-/whiie the i meaiate Oaaae of an 
agSn!t** ^'^^^^^ QimulÄiaieottBly with it . Iherefcre tUa urg-an-nt 

K nrwtt «im a:fc H < H igt nMi a iyfnft»g tha posaibift ontio tßpftndenct of tho 

Immedlste «ffect on its «f£n± oanaot be U£«d generally 8,;cakliig . 

It M^.hcv-oTer, te ralld in all tho^a oauoa «rhere tha affaot 

l£ tha arant of the inoa ptioa oS: a ooiißtant ötate of affatr« 

Ol of a uniform prooaaa. Bat Imxtt/perhapa affirm the ontlo 

dop ndona^ of the lii;:inll,.*i9 oause 

cm Its effeot? But let us 

)^B9i» Iri trdud In tho fÜrzt plfjoa the follovUng: Thj Imriiodiat« o^uai- 
thc osaaO iü thn rlgcro»ia a^riBe of th« ivorfl- or tho etatc of the 

a;?ätein arisen l>i> Ito ocoureooe Is-ae nt waß a?.rea4y aaid- In a 
pecalisr wj ''pinductlrely" Incomplf.t« and ai^ s resalt in Dood 
of Be!a{^ exid o o^rnl o mimt txid ort hy soiiiething namaly that the öaa^e 
Ir ?^Mc; to call jnto BeJn^: Ite effeot. T/hanovor a iuofc oxiilbita 
In Itt' tnnlter th^ peonlier defeot of "incompletenftaB''^ ol an 
i^to:^rml Inbalanoe In Ihf* gßneral ötste of itö mafceriai c:e UriTiina- 
ti ou, anf^ th^^roforü also of an ontla instabiiity or Eb^aliineefe^ 

It lji!js.«««ix^jddKitÄtx»£xJüttt not only i n noed of acmplementetlon 

bi>t bocoxe» by ölut of that aompl amen table ; In this com- 

plf^nente^bilitj; It I3 also ontically prodaotive (eeiüeprodulitiv) : 

It calln for thrt other facfc täat ötiils thia itiooüiplctexii.aö hxA 

in: t:il; .111*3» bj» rerriovlni; it and bj eatablishing ü. nau? eiuilibrium { 

bronght ebout 
it bringe abcut tUla feot aod reallaea lt. Thu thinß/risÄXiÄÄk, 

renli»6d ia pracis«l5 the effeot, the reoult* It iö by thö dofcot 

'iiat3d at that thn osuae booomeB oreatiyo . iiven aore th;.a that: 

the fact thct 1? a'bout to beooirie a oaube la of {;,uah a kind 

thct it wouJd be uaable not to produoe this other faci* it in faot 

oenuot eKlst er ooour without evokinf %hx\a Other tKin6,{tiie 

effeot) , rithoTit •^poolting^'i^, realising it^ TMs 1b a vory 

peo'ili^'r 03fle but still a oaae of onuio depeatLenoe of the thlng 

th. ^.?J in naed of onpl eine ntat Ion and compionient:abla cn the 

thirg that It "effects" and"ptttH''inaO Being» It I0 tu this 

fnct that the '•neoeeeity'* of the oauaal ontic occneotion so 


oftsn songht for (and yx^t as ofton denied) la grounded aa well 

aa the "Indtop'Jnur.Ml.lty'' -In a logloal ßonao- of the effeot for 

in th# 

y geiiörtttlve 

th© ««Otirrenct of *:>::e cau^e altiicugh the/ord^r ntx 

World of raalit? nini Ir t'ie oppo^.ita diröotion : it la not; the 
effect that gonsmtoQ tho oa'xae but the latfcer produoe« the 
effeot and dötirniineß Ih ar.e lulTOoallj ia xegard to ita material 

5?ha^ -'« m«3 d.irfareutiate batv^een two oonoapta of ontio de- 
ponaence fSelnsalihäiigifekeit ) . In tloi iliirmajt ona lnätanoe ontio 
depf5nd3no<? is llrJceri v^itlx tha eaiaaao^ ol the <mtioally dependant 
thinnr, in tha o*:her ^ne ontio dJi^pandojaco ia ddrlvod from the 
faot nal xorigination of the ontiaaüi' dependent thing fron another 
ajciatant» 'Ühia ^ ac ond kind ol' ontio dependenoe oharaotarizea the 
axlatant in Ti^ßtlon in individuo mid in relationm to another 
exlatent rlgorouat^? detorialned aa to ita individaallty . But this 
kind ia rigorouöly connected with the partiotiiar form of Äeing 
which wa oall rerJity ("Real Beingl), Bach individual real 
axiatent ia aa suah "ontically dependant" on another individual 
Real existent »Or to ^xpraaa it dlfferently: in ita Bai^ff oau<^aIly 
ll'SSSi'JS;* • '^^ shall therefora di^itiagolah betwean the factaal 
ontite de oendan oa of the affaot on the /«auaa and the aaaential 
on tio d ept^nd enoe of the oanaa on thaliK^^a« It is in thia 
dlfferenoa thpt tho exiatential sayminatry of the two terms of the 

o?\naal ontio oonuöotionK soniaiäta» But while the easential ontio 

dependenoe i& an existential mom^nt tha^ybeiongi aa well to the 

real existenta ■ « ma^t aa to the form of axiatanoe of ideal ob-> 

Jeota , the factual ontio dapendanaa ia an axiatent ial moiaent 
belonging Itt exoluairely t o roaX sabstantialitiea(obJeot3) ,narael; 
alwaya in thair relatlon to another araal substa itiality (^agan- 
atändliohkeit) , ^hia is the^n -if I iaax# say ao* an "intramundana'* 

axiatent ial moiaant whioh ia 

it^/different from derlyativa 

« 9 

B«lng whloh forma th« oontraa» to originaiiti* oX 3aing. it la 
poasible tJiet Aerivatlv« a«ing nxsuk bgionga to -jha form of 
B«inR of thö R««l a» »ucfa aud tJbau oharaotarlze» iirlmordi';y 
th« i«lat* j70rld «a a jffhol» in ita üelug anu ia its oxiatontlai 
relatlon to 3om«thlng illa« whiou t» poaaacaea original Ifc-y of Being. 
It l3 thsrflforasMX origioaUter aa extraBiundraie ax..öt.(intiGl ironiant- 
if tk-ÄKtaKit/ln an oltlmato onl;ologioo-mL^t,iph^äical roflcotion 
«3 the exlatentlal raoment of the r9sl wcrld. fl£) 

As to the eaeeatiai oucic dopeudonoe of fc'io eansr on 
the sffeot It ia groundod iu tha matsrial c^.Bar.ce of the osvae 
on on^ hand and on that of tl» atfecb oa tag o'üIi«r. ühi. mterial 
• s8«Qoa marlEs out tha oaua« by an cscential uuad Jü lomla-Boatatlon 
("Inooinpletan««»") aod bh« öXfoct by an ojsential " aptltuAe «f for 
oomplementatloa " of JomatUing ülae aa an intaitivol;; evident 

che «üsentiai mattars e f botii faotor» pf the 
«aueal oonnaotlon of Being. ^ oortain maUrial oc -.rlenentoritv 
of their esaanoe oharactsi'iaaa theao faotors and -rjalcss the 
aÄSLSSflÜJ of the oaasal oonuaoüiOii of. ■t'siag ocaiprohsueiblo, 

What vfaa alwapa aoagh* was a sjäterially tiOruisiisd n?*c«a3cjry 
ontlo oonnaotlon batwoan oau*,e attu ite afi'aot. And wbon'ii/v.'aa** 
MtxpRntkix ±xz2:tidbci±- aa almost tu the whoX? mod>ra philc- 
•ophy - than paopla tri^d at loaat to aoSJ:na a oaunal oonnootion 

bati»»«i U and W in thoae oadea v lan a ganaral "cauaal law" could 

afaaerta , 

be eatabiiaiifrA «bloh zlocluc«/ the 

of facta ,tha firat of whioh Is o "osusa" enä tbe othar an "effaot". 

The reason of tha whoia ioeptiaiam of Ram» fand hlt Imitators) 

ia dtte to the fact thtt aoco.alng tc Etirp.e»ji4 the pcfltirlete who 

followa« him an «baantial iui.terielij: 4;rüiu.de4 ontic conccotion 

of two feots whlah oould bc pjraoticallr d*olt with ao canse and 

•ffaot ia not aTident (18) -and If thg.t ^^x^ rigoroucly trut- 

-«ni^ „ftt ba fonnd eithar, W|i«t na ara diaoovaring in daily exparianoa 

wtioh forma tho atarting poiat of natural ooiario»? Is aocording 

tc t!ai9 is merely the ooourranoe of naroeroiis pairs ot facta 

öaoti ottier 
wtio^c n»mb«r« -aoocrding to Hume- pernenontl^ auoo^od äkJc^sKk^uat . 

But even Hum#»ö aoeptioiam do«£i aoi go so fsr as to dan? tbf 

phenomenoÄ •£ tho oaaaal ooruicoticii« Eu too triie to eTraaia 

thlo phetxMMiBoia of a ^nooet^aicy'' oümiootioo hc^t^^^n onn^e ayj* 

Effect e^an If he iktatok thinks t!;at/oc;:^li;lTgl:; s'^ U ^fgctpr;^ 

f^r ound oati be fouad for ^a^^ii an esamptiou o th.\t hc aoVßcwledges 

iBBtaly pe yoholoplcal motivea of öuch an eaa^mpticn» 

It la not posaible to pursue Jti^re aa objectirely Batia- 

faotory dlaouaaion vdth itt^Q. ±£ m havo rnöJitJioaoa nt all Tla^ae^a 

opinion« it iu/beoaa^Q evon liaiie v;hp advaaacd perhipe the relat- 

iTely waigl^tiaat oojeotilona again^t tha oziatcnoe of a necasaary 

eonneotian b^twaou ü and ^ , jLU not ^Imi^l:) duny t^is moxa^nt of 

neoeaaity ,he aerely utvaxs doubtö againct the po-jsibility to 

prova it in a oognltivoiy v/ell d^tormlncv^v and aooordin^ io hin 

tha only jaatified way» Aa for un onlj tr/o oonsideration« 

seem to ua important* Firat tJiat tl^i? neoeenar;^ cntio ccnnectlon 

axiats only batwean/aireot^ or.aea rmd effcct taken iu their 

original aanaa nct batvi/oüti the morc rfjrote linka ef a cauaal 

ohain whara it oanuou bo found» Sfiootid thnt tha exiatanoe of 

auoh a nacaasary onto uoniiaotion mag bxit naic^t? ty no meana 

laad to a parinancnt rapctition of tJtöarxaam the oauoall^ oonncotad 

paira of facta« 

Aö to tho firai; poiiit it shculd b'? aald thut tha opinlon 
pravailing ainoa ioüio t^xat it l3 l-ipo'>9ibla to find a neo»»3Bary 

ontic oonnaotiou bat .aon aaaaa and effaot ia partlj attributable 

we greap i» 

to tha faot that/in th« daily aa well aa/th« acientifioally 

organiaai axpöri»antal experienoa mnrtkarytygjri; only tatnporally yary 

oia&iata linka of a aanaal ohain« Our aanaa Organa oan provida ua 


in genital onl^ with a;^nthdtlo amalgamations cf a uanlfold of 
tönporail:^ diatinot i'acts whert onl;? ralatlyoly oonf>ldarabl# 
qualltatire differoncei are einerging frcnr ttma to tiinia ms 
percaivable aa ohangea and etataa of affalra xiell dellioltfed« 
Aa fcr cur aoientifio appar-tue of otaervatlon .;e oaii make with 


only tamporaliy 

diatant aeotlona wlthin the oonoreto prooeas of roal eventa« 
It iö tharefore onl:; natiiral that the tacitmaxBxxx33aä3jEiPo^ 

both of thaae methoda axhibit a templral di^itanoa whiob ia 

relatively oonsldarabla althougb often phantactioally amall for 

OUT htunan peroe^ptlon* Rere than töe "aau^a" may reallj be prior 

to ita affaot, an affaot of oouxaa whioh la t empor ally]^ quita 

diötaat from tha oausa and indlreot» Bur, 3awktngxa± suoh Indiraot 

do not a-iOTi 
llnka of a oausal ohalu nmxmmxxJsKMBm JtkHfcrthw|riCjrarax±m a naoeasarj^ 

materlally groundad ontio oonnootlon* From the asuabiishad faot 

that tha faot er T^ oooxirraA aa a cause and that au uabruicen chain 

of oauaal raiations n§^ n^^ Hj, •««« n^^ •••• leada/up to tha 

faotor Tp. , it ia only poaaibla to Infar that i\ maat alao 

ooour neoaaaaril^» Bnt to Aiaoern tho matarial oonteut of two 

faota aiid aboye all ioft tha mrterlfil content of tha immedlate causa, 

1 unrlterably 

to aea iritutiraly that tha Intter uuat/ba iategratad by by its 

matarialiy datermineä ontio oomplonant whioViLyDalla ini;o^ing 
praoiaaly for that raason, thie ia aomethlng «laa againji« That ()<J 
the oaasa oan aokiava thia - not antiraly by itaalf of soursa 

although ita 

ia llSaraöy daalaira- (14) thxj is ni due to 

ita ontia walght, its **for9a'\ ita partioalar ou'uia aaliirit^» (15) 

oonstitutaa a 

The paooliar ontio ralatirAfty of the faot that iJoam/liäUL oaoaa 
oannot ba saan froia tha matarial oontant of ita uffdot alona, 
both of tham - oausa and affaot^ - rmiat alviaya ooiae into vlaw« 
But (hie ia a nav aap^ot of th# pxoblam wa cunnot gc into mora 
oloaely haro«It is aleo perfaotly comprahanBibla that Huxna oould 
not find tha naad of oomnlamantÄtion öf th« rt«n«Ä« «4«%^* k* ä^«*. 

eidered onlj gi^en and ixiown fpQta aa affaota and looked onlj 
for "unknoviu foi-oea" aa thair o«ua««, -oho atata of eolonce 
at hia l!iwe,ä,.ipioiaily of ph,7£lca and ahemiatxy , h&s oontrubuted 
ft fraat de,il to all suis. But «vaa xSux lookiag at tho Tttvoevial 
ocnteat of tke aediaH li.oka cf a oeasAl chaln wa oaßnot saa 
tli« oatlc tndlgeuc« cf the cause and the oompleEenter^ abilit-? 
of the e.ffaoii, w« oftori faoe tha»» remote Kambera v/lth utter 
laok of comprehöÄElon, If we may esaaroe ia aomö^f/ey er ofcher 
tha existanoe oi' the meöiating llrOra, we csn -dee-lte tho lade 
of inaiglit- "öe tt Itsst cerfeein to söbu» dagreo that irtif? »ffpct'r'* ) 
would racUi' oconr bat wg^J^opk i nright into l-.jia jnrelj fältnal 
groimd_^ of oonriectlon bofcwaan an effect r and aome atar<-,irig 
polat. i'biß gronnd confilets namely In a serlaa of v.r)kKiOwa c&rtBeX 
ontio ooana«tlona, i'he tvitarial deteri&lnatioa of tha effeotV^ 
•ertaiaJ^ oonatitntog an implaoantatlon of Its i.ra^distg Q<vo.^e 
bat no qualitative Impiajwntatloa a« ^^ll of the Initial oariaa 
Bor düQs it aatisfy its nead for Implaraantatioa. It ia farth^r- 
moro thftt tha aualitatire Intasration of the inatsblilil;:; 
brought etout by the oause ia not to ba eougbt ta i,he Enccac dlnp 
faotö bat Iri what heppans simulfcuneäiisly \fil.h i;ho ceu£,c , Thus it 
ia not onl:,' nr.tnrol but parfectly ju^tified thr.t HiiiUv r.nd hi« 


iEitc^tora wara vxAhle to find an iRfciiltivel?T iatolllMUa groitni 
of the ncceasary suooeaaion of the mauiata linke cf c c?: .aal 
••ris«, But they laoked the nwareaeaa fcUet they dae3.t in thelr 
dlraotion of inreatigatlon only wlth the meÄinte llnJta of r 
oausal ohain. Tljuä they oaiie tc their aoeptloal coacln?iori.a con- 
werning xa$ any aad arer - ^ oauaal rei-tion withcut propo? 
3ti.itlflC8tion, (161, 

It ia Vary noteworthy aithoughli-ai?. notXcö* ia gcneral 
that deapite all aoaptioiam prev»iling in l;ho "phlloaophlcp.l" 
viawB of natural eolentiata aiaoa the ti ,iea of Home ooaoerning 



the posaibillty of t uioovoring a necteaory censal ontia oonoeoclon, 

«m attempt le niart.« not cnly la aodarn 
phjslOB-but alBO in oth«r branohe» of modarn natirel 30i«ri09 
for Instano« In «xperl-iAntal biology - to aarrow do.^a «gsAcx 
maxs»Ä«fckiÄxxtJCBcttJB««p«Ä with tha sid of «vor >iior« preaiaa 
method» of experimental »•ohnlin« aa far aa nossibli tae (.irco- apun 
between tu« f - » «*«-* paroeptible liaitc of e causal Btriea »äeir.iag- 
ly beoattse of tlw noR inaight tbat -.'hole periods of the factual 
phyaioal or biologloal prooeasea r.rt aklppad In iifce ooui-ße of 
the exporinental procaedings which-nnccnrered- coulä help ua 
aot only in T.he Solution of ooncrete solentiflc probleika bat 
above all makc us TiattaliBB thi» f«nuine oj v.^al oonnaatioa of 

faots. On tu« otber band tha «ffort is dlrected not onXj joward 

- throagh un appropriate dövel';>pmant of theory - 
a grasp /of Ike oonneotion of faots founü In axperienoa \-ihxoh 

aeam oftan at tt» fir«t gl*« whoUj ooieraut j'ct -.uiüoiioaivualo 

thelr ' , u 

btxt also toward/««« -g?-«*»9r o? 8«all3r-J»0£i£rohe^iaaon XB üb ühough 

the attampt war« Md« to approaob at loaat th» far distwit iiwiU 
of an inaight into neoeaaary oonneotion, Co iBai:« fcbo oatio oon- 
neotion betwean facta onderntandalile Is non the .»Itlmate ...oawing 
and tb« mala taak of tha Matharnnticsl th-^ory cf «mj ./ i^tmax^s, It 
aaeias thet .Ton the ^^^^^ .oi«rM'-.tß «ho . .« so poaltiyiü.ia- 

ally and «mpiristioelly orl#ntat^«d in ttielr general ofiaioas 
haye at leaat some inJcling of th« «xlatanc» of & nacaasari; raLeti-'n 
batwaan •▼•ry oauae and ita l7m«diato eff«ct, 
A8 for «h« anoetlon whathar the aflossa-irj- ocnnaotlon b«tY./3ga s 
oana« aoA ita «ff«ot ma«i» Bead to a r-o-rrsnoo of »noh pairB 
of facta w« au«t diatingoißh fl?3t of ai betv/oeti tvTO iaatmoea: 
thB Bxi ateno« of an «eaer^tial law of ncoosBnry ocuuection bat .-;o m 
two aabatantiaiitiea Ubjeota) and tÜ* faaf^al oaoarreno« of 
instano«« in th« world of r«ali%y «Hon aöoETöonneotion is realizod. 

It »does not Xcllow from the fir&t in:iic.not that imat rapaat Itsalf 
sevöral olmoo. 'Xhe exiatence or thir, ccrmoctjon hp.^ only the 
oonbeq^ut^aae thut If tu*- ulijueiit U«jc?i coci..ra In one 5.n£t?ciuoe in 
the real world ,t.he eXeisieut VT üiui^^t a3,30 nooeösarll;? oc^ur in it 
80 tliat wligneyer tiie fomar i^ thare ,the l^^ttar irniit aleo b^ 
fehere. Bat tha neoösägarj^ oouaacslon >)r>tw^:n tbe:a doos not ?^ntail 
the reoarrence of fcU© firat teria ü. Bat on t!iÄ other hand thu^faot 
that auojx two ^abataAtiailtlea (^eganatändllohkeiten) ooonr onl;:? 

Ottoe In the world la 2io proof that therd lg no neoasaai':^ 
oonneation bdtwaan tii.%im*J idt a3 the fsi^k o onstant ■mam/ ooouyrenoe 

Ä and B 
of sao'a dVoitaatiaiitl^ö /in a given perlcd of tJLie in th« 

World of/jfiality ii b;/ no means a anfflolent reaaon for the 

aaatimption oju the exisütonce of a neoessöjr? oonneotion betwean 

them* i'hitj oolnoidenoa oould Just b^ wall b«9 eatisad bjf aoma 

thlrd föotojr that-hi-^ notJiing in oorimon with th^ir aesenoe aiii 

8oma neoeööary oorfnectionö that inay roßnlt from it» ?hörafora 


no aiapirioal oüttaeotion of oaaaa whera a palr of airanta rapaata 

for c. law 
Itaelf oonatt-iutl^ can ever eatabli?h e luatifioation tmxxm mtxM 
of naoed8it;y« It oannot 
wjrgar mwyyxWianH g{ «JrtfiiTC e^en inorenaa the probabilit;^ of the 

existenoe of ^aoh a law in any aenat» The oonstant raourranoa 

of pairö of faota in natare may h?ippan aran if there ia no 

ralation of lieoe^Siit;^ between thasj • Thair oolnoidanoa ie than 

from the Jilaudpoiut of thair asiaenoe oomplatal^ aocidantal 

avtn if it lii juiitifiad fron snother point of vlaw« lut avan 

if a neooaaar;y oauaal ralationahlp axista batwaaa tha mambara 

of a pAir of facta , t*xa reourreno« of thia palr of faota 

dapenda on the rep^ated appearanoa of tha firat mambar in tha 

wirld «Ihli^ appearanoa ,howavar,la not dapendont on tha oharactar 

of tha ralation of naoaBoity obtr>lning batwaan tha two membera« 

Sren if wa aaaume a naoeaaar; oonneotion batwaan tha oau&a and 

ita immediata affaotp wa xmxst atill aaanma in addition a ao« 

oalled "regiilority " in na^ior« In order tc »tfeeln rUoyoasij 

B;ent!r£.l/ la«»>JdbaMte3tKX Ad long as tn« assertiou oj tb« üooailad 

vngalirln^ of oatur« ia aot proveA in aom« et her uixs aot dcpendent 

<m «apiriaal lawa «r oa tome g?aap of ttie oauaai ontio oonusotion, 

tha sooailad "genf-i-al" law« of natur« (wfcich arc onl^^ h± uooinaliy 

"oaasai l.nsa" ) j:s.mta mjröiy •jctxaijoiotiov't, of jmslj i'.uiilci^bsX 

law« whloh refer oaly to f&uta t.a4 pcir» cf fr.otB eatabj-iehod 

only up to & sm owrtSHin perlod ot i-ii.e. 

üniverslti? ciT Cj-80C>* 



(1) 'ilbXa ooairiü'i'iioa roru.s oua paiagruph cf t\7 tlria fn£ -n 
pabllBhed book "Da» Zeusrlproblon" CiJlie oausal proUlem) 'vhidi 1« 
tha lihird vJluiae üf nf woirk " ipör o iatnicni? Swi-^te _lj'^^ 
aigoment about tbe «xietenee of Vtw worid) publlshed in i-oiish 
Krakow ii^47/4a, 

(E) Cenparo fcr iattoiioe U^ataberg.Jiaaal aar ia sj^oorla ^-^^if^-f 
du tamps, I and II«3ttidia Philo3ophlaa,Vol. land II.Leopoll 1935 

and 1327. 

first - • 

O) I/tiiüd Lo prove tkia aaaditioa in %hß Vol.I or the a^ove uaued 
wori pag»a 104-186. a?h-ae raf lectiou» wäre also pabliaKed ia 

dt caaaalit« In tiie Joarnai 'itudia Pliiloaopftioa",Vol,III , 

OraaoTis'i« 134 i» 

(4). !Jba poüitii/iata doaj? thi» -in fnot alracd? Biace ..urie- 
again ana asain ox reproeeut it as aomathing that la not ^iyen 
in e;cporiouu9.2hiü ü aol ttid pUo« for a aoa.,iatM"^ti.üu of Uua 
•asdntially epiateoological probier -*hioh ia interfre-od ra.J^a- 

arwim«nta of tha poaitiviats with oo'vUiter-argumanta, »ut it 

tha m«« «wuM«t«iDc«« anooaaaion of two faota and a oausal 

oooüjo'.iou bGti^aeii thsm ocald ;iüt be o^'i«*,^^^:'""^^'..-"' 'l- i*-l2«ii^ 
in a theoretioal waj albhongh uobodj üom ta thot auoh a difforenoa 
exlsta. :..^ss^ir^ of tho ücoj^^a ity of ih«. cv.nsal councot; .on 
led-PB Is )ai««n- vith Home tc its r«xui.erp::9tation«itM as a 
PBv.c»ioicsic«:l ooiaptil.^ioa (vvhioh bv tba vfar? Ja al-?.o boiina to 
ooon» oauaalls) and -^nh Ijaat to the thoorj of tha a T.rlorl 
oriKin of 5ho cr.trcori' in luaatioa. In both tho^a Ina.Mors 
it ms iliirlnated from the world of reality-aa it e;ctata Independ- 
entl^ of üof-uitiv« oparatiOÄ» oc that it bsoar.« u-.el^as lof tfta 
diff'erentintien b»*wa«n of lihe oauaal ralatioiaHip fron mar« 
Bttooasaion. "Jha epT>«al to conatnat recarranca Bßd thfveby tto a 
"lau" of oawaal of oauual relationship that ia auppoaad to 
diffarantiata It from mero auooaaaion ißtroduoaa a oaw oompliaation 
into the oonoept of eauaal relationahip but oaanot sav« the pro- 
pertj of nooeaaitj of thia ralationaW-p. Thla appaal »o 


i ^6 

tittacteriötic of J^St» Tlill fjjid tha pOriltivleta of the 19th oentur;^ 
S not V'jry holplul a9 long aa thc '*law" in oueecion h^r* only the 

fJuraoter of an InÄ'iotlre f^onörali.xntlon. Bat donpite tha po^itivistio 
«eptloliim ttn^ natarnl üoi^noes st^ill ooutirme \»he a€;>roh f'^r ouuoöb 
iiat produo'i th^^lr nffoot:^» 5h.l;i oannot ü<9 o^hwwi«« b^r^auf^a It ia of 
'""lo ea.^t^riOH o2 'ohe oauöal x'aiatiouotiip wDbw bhe af -'ec- .Ll. «uinitod 
> ÜB coui?o, Onl7 l:f vrj atroas thla partiouliir nspect wf» get tii« 
iist. A)jjio3x probioiL how it ie provod or oan be pruvnd iu a oogrilllve 
v^'C-j« TTüii if thli; pro'^vlOTÄ sliorlfi bo iclved Ti^gatirely ,lri tha aonae 
namelSjthat liiioli a oonnaotion iß not giveu tm wiichln the ranrr'.oua 
e>cperlenoe ac^oaaalbl^ lo as , thU- would not äff not at «ill tha 
0ö3tfrtO(^ Ol tha ouu^al ralatiiunöhip « I\# wouud onl^ niean th^t vu h?ive 
HO empirical W9 .rrant tc aacart to asaart thei faot^ia l ooonrranaa 
of oausal r^^ialiicuTKipo in iiho raatorxai wox'lu ^lYon ht nc» 


(5) The argvmtatatica cf Hucie wa& baü^eoi/öd tc> incirlve ori tloiti^u 

by A*Reinaoh# DomT^rr© "0<5f.arr^T,;elte Schriften.** i'b© ^Vlle^ed fact thot 
t;he produot/ion of tho effi^ot by lih«^ oauoo ii\ uot g.tvoii h-:-;:' btt: 
also investlgateö crit5-cnllv by rÄScbolog^.Oompare 4 3icbotta,La 
•.^eroaptlon u^ la eauLaiitiä« 

(6) That ihli:. vhcle essteiü tliat it»il into a State of ittroq^Tili^rluri 
and not cm?».? tbe avcnt fch>«t fonaa the "Onuac'* by itself ,produoea the 
effeot it in accoa'ciaiQöe ^ita oar dotarraination of tihe conaspt ci' 
aau^e nnd of the clrcuTn- tanoea ur^der v^bioU it cooura, B^t thia 
Oannot be atctea h@ri» in detail* 

(7) In a\ving Paragraph thet ia not given b«r©t 

(8) Ia thü sönet tlatod in ny woric '*Ttie argutncnt «bOwit tb.* »xl/taru^ 
of tho Y40Tlä^Yol^ I jPDgos liO-l»? • CoiripfeU*e a.l80 itxy paoer '•Les Uodaa 
d'Bxiii'.'üance ot Lo Pxobi&iuö *'IdeaXie.ia-iiüaiife>i:i^^' '* {Iircc^j9dirij^ii of tha 
Tonth Jon5:f^£i3 of I'hilo .ophy ,vcl» I, /aa£.tordaiu 1949) # 

(9) Thi .'^nf^ for inatauoc 4f oa© bod;> warma another ono or wh«n 
ahe inipaot of one re^uitö in thc aiAucrhlng of pnother oue* Thc-t tlot.e 
two bodlea tonoh one another ia of no importanoa« 

flO) Oomp^ra Ir^oc cltato 

(11) Tb« procf cf tht^ iduteaoö Is dona in one of che uext paragraphs 
of thiü booi:. atiioii 12 not pabiij.iaßd hcro. i'hir, uoint is ihcrcfcTa 
aot ahOT^o hQj% 

(12) B«oaui:<> thnre «xiata -aa ia kaovÄi ,a uhiloöophioai and eEpeoiail;^ 
a met&pUyiioal vio'^ -t:io aateriali;^ tic ona- \7hioh coreidcra ^:hr crld, 
and eappoially tha xnnterial world , aa outioaily primordial* (aaina- 
TiTöprUngliob;* 3?ur this rcadoii too it is ncceasar^ tc -rxore ifici 
poaaible ontioally darlratira oaaraotor of the world of realit^* 

(13) Tbl?, la of courfio the orlßin&l Hujaa'ian formuiation of his 
standpoirtt although iiuvao also ^pe^iks about Mütriition^ in oonr^eotlon 
|7ith the "relationa of 14a;*i'' aasuiiicd by hia* It ia oaly a for^calati 
tixakas il/ö ataruing-polut in the moderii phcnonisnolofrionl r5Sör>rch» 

I (14) Shi^ cuixaot be ^hovm here . 'l'ha f:.roof vAll bo p;lTca in ? 
Ing Paragraph of tha booii laoutioncd abov«# 



(iS) Ther« is -and rightly öo- ^ tendenoy In everyday life and alao 
i 1 Boienoa to oonnoot oloaaly with aach other the two oonoepta of 
"tmumT and '*foroa^. It ia trua that pcaitivi^tio oritiaiam triad to 

rer OTa frnm ph^^aioa tha oono^pt of "foroa'*, Hut ren^rki'bl^ cnor-Th 
alcng \vil,h wiiiö ta^ oonaapt of cnna© W39 ^Iso -jxcluaed from ph^/sloö 
-et If^aüt thiB waa tho tendonoy- aud roplrioed hj 

thf ocnocpt oi a oo ^Iti-"^! itionli^ intarpretad foaoticmal Oüoruijaation 
(ZnoAdming) • But Jdjtxjxi±r:c thad «770 oouijapta ri'j^.^r venV^f l!?9r'r:-Qr^ed 
;rom aoiiiatiflo rrfijtl';^ dasplt^^ all edlota of pOAitivxatici matihodoloi^^ 

3 factual procaaa of tha axrflrimÄntal work vf'-r» ':»ou^tantii:>' detcriujuae 
'kl) thcae :otLCjopte# 

(.\5) In one paaaage cf hia '^Treatlß«" ünrm oomiftttod i^^i\;h 'Av^ 
p<^38ibilit;' whv^v iMi ofr« ot oo<;ur9 bi^"^^ltntt•öualy with ita inuiediatv ' 
oia«^«. ^at he r^^bntted thla idßjti bocan'*-,«»^ he »r-w ' m n^y^'r rf 

arir ■ ux' worla ."^ tc^ry ir>to one ainpl^ :iiom^ut ouü did not / 
w how üo rfnov^ lt„ i 





Gallcy 5 


1 This ifs a sliglitlv abbreviated Version of tho introductorv articie of tlie 
book bv Tadeusz Czezowski entitle.l "Pl.ilo.sophical Prolectiöu«" (0>lr^i/ty 
tdozoficzne) by the Scieatifi. Society in Torun (Towarzv.stwo 
Isaukowe w Toruniu), Contributions of the Philologioo Pliilosopiiical Division, 
Vol. Vir, Part I (Praee Wydzialu FilologicznoFilozofieznego, Tom VIl' 
Zeszyt I). The translation, from tiie Polish, is by tiie special editor of this' 
issue of the Joi-rnal. 

Tadeusz Czezowski is the editor of Euch Filozoficzny, created by Kaziniierz 
Twardowski and mentioned in tlie text. 

■jV/rORE than half a Century has passod sinop Twarclowski took 
ITA over, in the autumn of 1895, his duties hs profe.ssor at the, 
University of Lwow, and 10 years have passed since his death. 
Fifty years arc a lon^^ period, and we have lived to see sinee then 
two ehan-es of philosophical interest : one occurred in TwardoAv- 
ski's lifetime; the seeond one— after his death— was brou-ht about 
by the last war, althouoh it was already prepared durin- the 
pre-war period. The end of the 19th Century was the period of 
psycholof-y in philosophical investifiations. This was perhaps an 
echo of the principle already prevalent in the ISth Century that 
a cntique of eo-nition should have as its foundation the analysis 
of its oenosis. This echo was stren-thened by the fact that 
p.sycholo!>y was thon a philosophical discipline which could boast 
of Its greatest aehievements concernin? the scientific method of 
mquiry and its results. This dominant position of psycholo-y 
in the philosophical disciplines appeared in the form of psychoh)- 
gimi, I.e., the conception that psycholo-y is the basic scienee of 
all sciences ni the sense that the subject matter of all other sciences 
IS friven to US in mental phenomena and should therefore be 
nivestioated from a psycholo-ical point of view and by applyin- 
psycholooical methods and laws. Thus, for instance, lo-ic was 
eonsidered by psycholo-ism as a discipline whose subject matter 
IS mental proccsses occurrin- i„ reasonin-; its task is the formula- 
tion of the laws of eorrect thinkin-. The determination of the 
Object of investi-ation of physies was also to be achieved by the 
analysis of the p.sychical process of Observation and by the detection 
of the objective Clements within it ; aesthetics and ethics were often 
ident.fled with the psycholojry of feelinjr and will; and similarly 
the humanistic sciences were eonsidered as divisions of applied 

It is well-known that this state of affairs underwent profound 
ehan-es m a short time thereafter: psycholo-ism collapsed and 
psycholooy itself experienced a crisis in its concepts and methods 
in different directions. As a result we saw a new face of 
psycholopy, a renewal of its experimental methods, an attempt 
at a new determination of its subject matter and of its tasks 
The collapse of psycholo-ism was connected with a fundamental 
transformation of the bases of mathematics and lo<ries; a new 
grasp of the essence of these sciences reached preat depths; they 
had a flowerino. never before experienced. The result of all this 
was a pheiiomenon analooous to the previous psycholo-ism, namely 
a logicism in philosophy, i.e., the conception which attributes to' 
lojric the dominant role in philosophical speculation just as 
eholof^ism attributed it to psycholo-y. This was the position 
ot the Vienna Circle and of its neo-positivistic continuatives. un- 
doubtedly the most prominent and liveliest eenter of philosophical 
thought between the wars. 

The period in which we now live shows once more a radical 
chanj^e of direction in world view; a turnin- awav from philo- 
sophical minimalism-to the term coined by Tatarkiewiez- 
toward maximalism. Dialectical materialLsm is winnin.- new 
positions, the Neo-Thomist movement is inoroa^in^ i„ „i... „„,i 
or-anization, and alonj;- with them existentialism develops. linked 
with the German Levensphüosophic of the previous decades. 

These two turninpr points, the first of which occurred already 
in Twardowski's life-time, sujr-est the question as to the position 
of his own philo.sophical work in view of the chan-es mentioned. 
We shall find an an.swer if we are aware that he recommend.'d as 
against both these doctrines— positivistic minimalism 
and ideolo-ical maximalism— Aristotelian moderation. II is per- 
sonal scientific sympathies were doser to minimalism, but after 
havm? abandoned his former psycholo-istic position, he came 
forward— especially in his articie on symbolomania and pra-mato- 
Phobia— apainst too far-reaehin? lojricistic tendencies. As to 
metaphysics, we should mark his words pronounced at the 25th 
anniversary of the Polish Philosophical Society in 1929 - • 
lon/^lT""'"''' ^'"'"'"'" °^ *'"" ^""''^ Philosophical Socictv in Lvvow 12 II 

v,V V^'"^""' ^"'°'' '^•^^' ''•''«" 1 •■'"•1 follo^ving (Ksirfja Pami^tkou^a 
folHkirgo Touarzysttvn Filozofczrifgo wr Lwoirir). 

''Who would deny that the need of a philosophical world- and 
Me-view is ever stron?er . . . ? This qu<>stion is undoubtedly 
most important to anybody who considers the traditional relLnous 
conceptions as insufficient and does not want to walk throu-di 
hfe thoufrhtlessly. But is it proper for an or-anization possess- 
mp and desirino: to preserve its scientific character, devoted 
exclusively to a methodical work of inquirv, to spread some 
philosophical-that is metaphysical— world views .' . . . Does not 
scientific criti(,ue forbid the acceptance and the spreadinjr of ideas 
pn.tendin- to have a definitive answer to the most difficult 
questions that can oceur to man .' . . . It seems that there is an 
unsurpassable abyss between a philosophical, i.e., a metaphysical 
World view and scienee" (p. 8). 

But let US eontinue to quote : "... the relationship of the 
philo.sophical World view to scienee is not as simple as its opponents 
sometimesassume" (p. 9). . . . "The metaphysical svstems present 
themselves, it is true, as un.scientific ideas. but at th(> sam.> time as 
pre-scient.fic concepts. i.e., as concepts which scienee should not 
condemn or treat dis.iainfully without exception. There mi-dit 
be some truth in these unscientific world- and life-views that only 
rerpures scientific elaboration to exhibit its whole importance 
aml It IS the special sciences that perform this task accordin.r to 
their raupe of interest.s. In this scientific formulation 
Ol such ideas— metaphysical at the start— the special sciences 
cooperate on the .strueture of a scientific world- and life-view 
beeause the creators of the metaphysical doctrines are themselves 
aimuifr at such a .scientific view insofar as tliey consider in their 
insijrhts the results of the special scientific inquiries. Thus a 
certain reeiprocity arises: the special sciences cull ideas. concepts, 
and theses from the ni(>taphysical Systems, and the latter pet thein 
back from the special sciences in a scieiitified form. As this 
process develops, fl.e philosophical world- and life-view will emerire 
more and more from its unscientific and prescientific stat.> and 
pi-adually approaeh the scientific world- and life-view. It will, 

!l"Tu'ü' r"''^ "PP'-ofH'li it. beeause the evolutioiiary i)rocess 
skctchcd abüvc will iit-ver rcach its iimit ... (pp. 13-14 j. 

J. PIIILOS.— 11109 

Oalley S 

Far froiii all oxtremisni, Twardowski chose as his owii field 
the fundamental questious of the theory of science in «■cneral. 
The most important amon^' these were: the distinction of the aet, 
of the Contents, and of 1:lie object of ideas {Vurstclltinyoi), the 
relationship of these eoutents to the objeet ; the strueture of the 
content of concepts; the relationship of the act to its creation in 
the mental and psycho-phy.sical fields; the relationship of a State- 
ment to its verbal utteraniu>. 

The author hiinself eonsidered these fundamental works of 
his, in aecordance with his primary psycholopistic position, as 
psycholopical — which, however, they are not because they en- 
compass no iiupiiry leadinf-' to the formulation of inductive psy- 
cholofiical laws fouiuled on any eonsiderable observational 
material. They are rather contributions to the ^»■eneral theory 
of knowledjze and as such they have withstood suceessfully the 
test of tinu'. Tlieir premises and results are in accord with the 
results of a methodolo<iy based oii contemporary logical theories. 
Twardowski 's ideojrenic theory of jud?:ment corresponds to the 
assumption of contemporary lojric that the theory of sentences is 
the basic one. Ilis analysis of the "concept," which divides it 
into an indefinite fundamental idea and a presented judfiment, 
may be translated into assertioiis about propositional functions as 
the modern analofjues of "concepts" in older logic. As for his 
distinction between the mental activity and the psyehophysical 
result of such an act, this has become one of the fundamentals of 
the theory of humanistic sciences. 

But the influence exerciscd by Twardowski on our philosophical 
life is by no means reducible to the theoretical results of his 
scientific work. He acted most powerfully as an academic teacher 
and Organizer. When he took over his chair in Lwow, very many 
philosophical influences met on our soll: German neo-criticism, 
which was known and propa<>ated in its various shadinp:s, the 
English positivism of Mill and Spencer, and the empirio-criticism 
of Avenarius, to mention only the most important ones. That 
none of them became as fruitful as the Brentano tradition brou?:ht 
to US by Twardowski can only be explained by the personal activity 
which he developed in the two mentioned directions. Twardowski 
created in Poland a native philosophical style by his own example 
and his teachinp' activities ; and he was able to implant and to 
spread it far beyond the circle of his pupils and those whom he 
influenced personally. 

Twardowski 's teachinp' was based on the premise that 
philosophical inquiry is a scientific one and should satisfy the 
requirements of scientific critique and rijior. . . . 

Twardowski taujiht etfectively by his own example and devised 
an ensemble of didactic means that became a permanent feature 
of the teachin<r of philosophy at the Polish universities. If we 
adopt those didactic methods today. we are not always aware that 
it was Twardowski who introduced and to a preat exteiit created 
them himself. ... He or<;anized on Polish soll the first philo- 
sophical Seminar and the first psycholojrical laboratory. . . . His 
or<.'anizational activity in the field of philosophy Avas an exterision 
of his university career. . . . Twardowski founded the Polish 
Philosophical Society in Lwow as the first orp;anization of this 
kind in Poland. He came into close contact with Wladyslaw 
\yeryho, the founder and editor of Przcglnd FUozofwzny (Philo- 
sophical Review) ; he initiated the publications of the Polish 
Philosophical Society, thus providin<r a framework for creative 
scientific work . . . and a possibility of piiblishinp: it. The Polish 
Philosophical Society became an expression of Polish philosophical 
opinion; it orfianized it in concert with similar associations, 
representinpr Polish philosophy at home and abroad. Soon — also 
due to the initiative of Twardowski — Polish philosophical meetinfjs 
took place — at first tojrether with Polish physicians and natural 
scienti.sts and then in the jjcriod between tlie two wars, independ- 
ently, as the larjrest orpanizational form of our philosophical 
life. Finally, we must mention apart from this the Journal Ruvh 
Filozofivziwj (Philosophical Movement), which was founded by 
Twardowski and directed by him until his death, as a native 
orfranizational form of Polish philosophical thou<rht. Its task was 
Information about philosophical events in Poland and in the 
whole World, . . . liuch Filozofirznif performed faithfully this task 
of unitinpr people throu>,'h information and contributed perhaps 
most to that coherence in the Polish philosophical domain which 
is the merit of the Avhole activity of Twardowski. 

Let US look now — when avc are rebuildinjr Polish scientific 
life — after the cataclysm of war — at the new and old universities 
and the philosophical societies workinjr alonjr with them. We shall 
see that in all of them, in Warsaw, Cracow, Poznan, Wroclaw, 
Lodz, Lublin. Torun, the jiupils of Twardowski or the pupils of 
his pupils are aetive and that they even eonstitute, in many uni- 
versities, the majority of teachers of ))hilosophy. Even the very 
terrible experiences which our Nation had to pro throu<.di did not 
destroy the continuity created by the activity of Twardowski. 
Therefore 1 may perhaps ri'peat here what I said ten years ago 
at a memorial meetinjj in the Aula of the University of Lwow : 

"In Order to understand the results of the activity of Kazimierz 
Twardowski, we must consider the state of philosophy in Poland 
at the end of the lOth Century, it dcvcloix'd in uiu-oniiected 
Centers. The tradition of Komantie ))hilos()phy had died but 
there was nothinp: to replace it. Polish philosophical students, 
educated for the most part abroad, brou<rht from there ideas 
which they tried to ti-ansplant into our soil, but there was no 
internal continuity of philosophical inquiry because a native school 
of philosophy \\as lackin<r. It was Twardowski who created one 
(and 1 want to mention that the first one to use the term "the 
school of Twardowski" was Wladyslaw Weryho in the article 
"A Decade of 'Przep^lad Filozoficzny," " PrzKjhid Fihzoficzny, 
Vol. XL 1908, pape iv). 

"This school was ready when we repained independence and it 
was stron<r and sound to such an extent that it became dominant 
not only in the newly created posts of philosophical activity in 
the whole of Poland b\it impressed also students of |)hilosophy 
not linked with it directly. They did not abandon their con- 
victions or the subjects of their in(|uiries but the methodolDjrical 
exijrencies, the fornndation of i)hilosophical ipiestions character- 
izinjr the school of Twardowski became «reneral in Polish philo- 
sophical work. The earefidness in terminolopy, the exactness and 
elarity, one would like to say the sob(>rness, of philosophical 
thinkiu«:, the native type of rationalism and reaiism that marked 
the phil()soi)hieaI work of Twardowski, all this became a retjuire- 
ment of correctness that transcended the limits of direct and 
indirect nnnils of Twardowski. 

J. PIIILOS.— 11109^ 

Galley % 

"Thus tho infliieiice of the philosophical activity of Twardow- 
ski spread over Polaiid, creatiiij? a certaiu style of philosophical 
werk and unitin^' thereby the disjeeta membra of Polish philos- 
ophy. h also ereated a unity in terms of time. For years the 
pupils of Twardowski have been aetive in the philosophical chairs, 
a new jjeneration of their pupils have taken iip the philosophical 
Avork, some of them even as acadeniic teachers. . . . This is not 
merely a repeatinjr of the words of the Master. The most prominent 
amonf? Twardowski 's pupils went their own ways . . . but the 
continuity of development remained uutouched and with it the 
unity of philosophical work. ..." 

If we talk today at the lOth anniversary of Twardowski's 
death about Kazimierz Twardowski . . . his teachings are still 
alive, especially the main principle: the requirement of scientific 
method in philosophical inquiry, and also other demands which 
he addressed to philosophers: those of honesty, impartiality, 

courage. ... » 

Tadeusz Czezowski, 1948 

University of Torün 











;J. PHIDOS.— 11109 




.* This is a translation of section 2 of the olmpter "Form and Content 

.of-the Literary Work," contained in Vol. 2 of "Sturtia z estetyki" (Rtudies 

in Estheties) publiehed by the State Institute of Scientific Publications, in 

Warsaw, 1958. The book forms a part of tlie "Pltilosoplücal Works" of 

Roman Ingarden. Translation from the Polish original by the special editor 

of this issue of the Joubnal. 

AMONG the proups of problems that T have distinpuished thiis 
far the question of the essenee of form and content is rela- 
tively least dependent on the Solution of the remaining questions 
and its Solution constitutes the basis of their Solution. I shall 
therefore start my further eonsiderations from it. 

I -have made detailed investigations of this topic elsewhere.* 
1 Compare R. Ingarden, Spör o i.stnieiiie swiata (Argument about the 
Existence of the World), Krakow, 1947-48, Chapter VIII. 
Here I shall be satisfied to give the most important results, taking 
into consideration especially those things that have a special 
meaning for the literary Avork. 

As I have mentioned, the words "form" and "content" 
(matter) have been used Avith many meanings. These meanings 
-must be distinguished and made more precise if possible. 

1. The leading idea of one of the most ancient contrasting 
.eonceptions of "form" (morphe) and "content" (matter, hyle) 

is the concept of determining something by something eise. In 
this case the determining factor is the "form"; what is deter- 
-mined, qualified by form, is "matter" (contents). Within thiß 
meaning every property of something, for instance the redness 
of a sphere, its smoothness, its weight, etc., is "form" while the 
things which these properties serve are matter.- This is the 
main concept of form -' as used by Aristotle. 

- This ansvver ean be stated in another way. One could say that every 
property of something is its form. But in this formulation we have to do 
already not with the problem of essenee but with a certain Solution of the 
constitutive problem of form. 

3 "Main concept" because even in Aristotle this concept is not un- 
equivocal, because it is possible to find with Iiim also other meanings of 
ithese terms. 

This apparently so clear concept of form leads to all sorts of 
.difficulties on a clo.ser look, and issues as a result in other 
.concepts of form. I shall deal with that soon. But difficulties 
not less great are inherent in the concept of "matter" as the 
opposite of form thus understood. In a general sense, "matter" 
is something determined by ' ' form, ' ' but in itself it has no determi. 
nation whafever. Consequently, it cannot be investigated under 
any aspect of any form determining it nor can it be taken within 
the form or together with it. Naturally a pure "matter" without 
form "forming it" in some way does not exist. And in the same 
way form without matter does not exist either. But even if we 
take matter in coexistence Avith the form, it cannot be said what * 

* This is the way that it should be expressed, rigorously speaking, although 
it is not !t good expression in the grnmmatical sense. But the question "what 
sort of thing" a thing is, what it consists of, has another meaning. Compare 
"Questions of Essenee" (pytania esencjalne), Proccedings of the "Towarzys- 
two Xaukowe Lwowskie" (Lvov Scientific Society) of 1925, or the German 
original "Essentiale Fragen." 

it is, because every "what," everything that would determine it 
as matter, would already be — in the present meaning of form — 
form, not matter; and matter by itself without this "what" is 
no "something""— that is, it is nothing and therefore does not 

2. In a certain sense the concept of "form" and of "content" 
("matter"') current in the eontemporary formal theory of objects 
(in the so-called "formal ontology") is quite contrary to the 
Aristotelian one. But we can reach it in reflecting on the "form" 
in Aristotle 's meaning. Within the thing that constitutes the 
"determination"' of something eise two moments may be distin- 
guished: a certain qiialitif (in a rrn/ hrond sense, i.e., for instance, 
not only redness or smoothness but also a certain determined 
spatial shape, certain spatial dimensions, etc.), and its " funrtion" 
of dctirmininy sonirtliiny eise, which it fulfills in regard to the 
thing which it deterraines. It is possible especially to distinguish 
in any property as such — as one of the Aristotelian "forms" — on 
the one band, for instance, this smoothness and. on the other band, 
its serving a certain thing and being therefore. through this 
Service, its determination, its shaping. That quality taken alone, 
which is contained as a non-independent monient in the whole, 
ealled after Aristotle "form," can now be called "matter," while 
the above-mentioiied "serving," "determining,"" etc., may be 
called "form""' because it is due to this service that something 

•" Xaturally this is only one particular case of "form" in this sense. 
Another form of this kind is "being a »ubject of properties," etc. 
like smoothness, redness, sphericity, etc., determines something 
which is .smooth, red, spherical. A quality which Stands within 
that form, fulfills the function of a determining factor in the 
sense of the Aristotelian "form.'" As a closer investigation 
would show, there are many various "formal" moments of this 
sort in this new sense. The whole multiplicity of various 
"qualitative"" moments which may be distinguished within a 
particular object constitutes its füll "matter," while the multi- 
plicity of the formal moments interlaced with each other consti- 
tutes in its combination the "form" of the object. However, the 
Avhole Aristotelian concept of "matter" disappears here entirely 
and in its stead other concepts come to the fore, for instance the 
concept of the subject of qualities. etc. 

I call the form in this sense the "categörial" form* or the 

• This expression should not be understood in the Kantian sense as a 
certain factor a priori shaping the "phenomena" but in the sense employed 
by Husserl. 

form within the meaning of eontemporary formal ontology. The 
concepts of "form" and "matter"" in this sense cannot be defined 
more speeifically, since they form certain ultimate, primary con- 
cepts, and, indeed, correlative concepts, i.e., concepts defining each 
other complementarily. They ean only be elueidated or clarified. 
Everything that exists in some way "has'" some "categörial" 
form and some matter. And there is no matter which might not 
stand within a certain proper form and there is no form which 
might be deprived of a certain matter; they cannot be separated 
from each other, i.e., they are in an ontic sense always niutually 
dependent in concreto. In works of art it is also necessary to 
differentiate the categörial form and matter in this sense ; but this 
is naturally a very xperinl case and it is possible that they occur 
here in certain special forms. It would be necessary to define spe- 
eifically their extension so as to find the whole ränge of what is 
imnnrfntit for the structUTC Äüd '^os'^iblT' hIi^o for th" valüc of h 
work of art and especially of a work of literary art. It would 
be necessary, in other words, to possess a different, narrower 
concept of "matter" and "form" in order to use it in the theory 
of the work of art. I shall try to do that later on. 

-J. PHILOS.— 11109 

Galley- 9 

3. Another concept of "form" and "content' —which will be 
not without moaninp for our purpose— is in close connection 
v/th the concept of an object (thing, bein?) as a coUeciion ^ (some 
sa'y ,^ "clas»^') of elements-parts. I call this conception a "class" 
coneeption of an object. In this case the parts out of which a 
cfcTtain eolleetion (whole) is composed are considered the 
"content " ("matter"). The relations between the parts. how- 
ever, or t he totality of those relations in a certain eolleetion or 
Mhole is t.He "form" of that eolleetion or of that whole. Thus, 
for in'stance, the pieees of wood of whieh a certain table is com- 
posed the bi icks of whieh a certain wall is made, and so on, are 
the "matter" or the " content«" of these objects; the spatial re- 
lations, however, obtaininfr between these parts, the method of 
Arrangement aloug each other, etc., are the form of these objects. 
Leaving aside various diffieulties occurring if one tnes to 
elucidate more dcfinitely the eoneepts of the "whole and of 
"parts" and abstracting from the question whether a class 
concept of an objec-.t is correet and tenable (I have dealt with 
this question elsewhere% it is still neeessary to «tr-ess that a given 

rCompare « Axgume nt about the Existence of the World, M3. 
"form" is here always relative in regard to a eertaui whole or 
content, or to the specific mode of division into parts. If we 
divide the same whole into certain selected parts and then make 
another selection, we shall have in every single case another 
form of wholeness and naturally another "content. »econd: 
there exists here a hierarchy of "forms" and "content« depend- 
in.^ on the order of parts and on the order of wholenesses taken 
into consideration. The parts (elements) whieh are m some 
relations or other to eaeh other and on whose selection among 
other things the "form" of the more comprehensive whole whieh 
is eonstructed out of them depends,« may be analogous y formed 

8 This floes not mean that this form is the only poss.ble one gnen a 
certain selection of "parts." On the contrary, in «-^l'f-" ^ 'J^^Ts 
selection of "parts" (componcnts) various arrange.neuts of the relations 
between them are possible and consequently also various forms: out of the 
Ime tie\: variou^ houses can be built. But this Jatitude is not un :mUed. 
A given selection of parts designa.-xs a determined eolleetion of forms 
belonging to it as its possibilities." . j j ;„ 

if they are themselves eompounded of further parts ordered m 
some way: If, for instance, the brieks out of which the wall is 
made are themselves composed of lumps of elay and the latter of 
certain moleeules, etc.; and if among the parts of every one of 
these elasses some relationships or other obtam, for instance 
spatial, temporal, or others. Whether this hierarchy is limited 
from beloiv depends on whether we assume that there exist 
"simple parts" (ultimate elements) whieh cannot be deeomposed 
further or whether we reject this possibility. In the former case 
it would be neeessary to assume that there are parts whieh con- 
sidered separately by themselves have no form within th<^ ^^^^^"S 
defined above. In addition, these parts taken separated by them- 
selves are no "eontents" any more. They are always Contents 
only in regard to a certain superior whole (a whole of superior 
order) (and this is true of all parts, eompounded or simple ones) 
But even those ultimate parts, no longer eompounded, exhibit 
their "matter" and eategorial "form" and also the form m the 
Aristotelian sense. In order to avoid this terminological con- 
fusion, it would be neeessary in the ease now discussed not to use 
the terms "form" and "content," but to talk rather of the 
"arrangement" of parts of a certain whole (of their ''ordering 
in a whole) and of a "selection" ("eomposition ) of the parts 

of a certain whole. >. „„^ 

4. A eompletely different pair of eoneepts of form^ and 
"content" is linked with the distinction between the what 
(whether, for instance, a thing exists, happens, etc.) and the 
"how" (for instance, how it exists, how it is given, how it is 
presented, etc.). Here the "what" is the "content" and how 
the "form " But sinee the distinction between the what and 
the "how" (although it is continiiously employed) is not clear 
and univoeal enough, the eontrasting of "content" and form m 
this sense entails similar drawbacks. It is not known espeeially 
what that "what" means. Most often one has in mind in this 
ease a certain thing or more generally a certain object with which 
something happens or whieh simply is here. But very often a 
certain partieular moment of this object is thereby considered 
the one namely which determines that a certain thing is what it is, 
in other words its "what" or-if one may say so-its nature (its 
ti en etnai). The "how" is similarly multivocal, but its multi- 
vocalitv is in general independent of that of the what in 
question. What is in question here is (1) the mode of exu.tence 
of something (for instance, real as against phenomenal or ideal 
existence) ; or (2) the mode in whieh a certain "what" is given us 
(more generally : how it is cognized by us), for instance, by percep- 
tion, in thought, etc.; or (3) the mode in whieh something oeeurs: 
if for instance, somebody sings "beautifully" or flies qmetly 
0,^ danees "lightly," etc.; or finally (4), the mode in which a 
certain "what" is "presented," for instance, in a work of art 
with the aid of some arrangement of phenomena (looks) or a 
certain system of signs, of a certain selection of states of affairs, 
etc The concept of "form" will depend in all these cases on 
the specific "how" which we have in mind and it will issue out 
of such eontrasting pair of eoneepts. Although the multivocalities 
of the terms "what" and "how" are independent of each other 
nevertheless only some "how's" (that is, "forms ) will 
correspond to a certain concept of "what." We cannot go mto 

this further. , ,, 

As for the relationship between the "what and the hoA\, 
on the one band a certain "what" is always linked with a certain 
"how" and vice-versa, but simultaneously one and the «ame 
"what" may be coördinated with many different "how s — tor 
instance, one and the same motion or at least a similar motion 
may oeeur in many various ways. But this is also true vice-versa; 
one and the same-and espeeially a similar-" how may be 
linked with various "what's." For instance, within a similar 
mode of presentation in a literary work, different persons and 
even different things may be seen. May a eompletely arbitrary 
"what" go along with an arbitrary "how"? This is a question 
which cannot be decided here but it is not probable. And iinal y, 
if a certain "how" is changed, can a certain determined what 
remain without any change? This is sometimes affirmed, but it 
is a question whieh should be considered separately. In any ease 
it should not be forgotten that there are seholars who affirm that 
no matter how small the change of the "how" (for instance of the 
mode of presentation), it entails corresponding, regularly ordered 
ehanges in the "what" linked with it. Therefore the so-called 
formalists eonclude that no distinction should be made between 
the "form" and the "eontents." But this conclusum is no 
justified as I shall try to show. These different opinionsabou 
he "what- and the "how" prove, however that despite the 
apparent clarity of this eontrast a number of questions romain 
unclarified, a.ul the source of all this confusion is the lack of 
prccisiou of the eoneepts of "what" and "how. 

^. PHILOS.— 11109 

jGiallcx IQ 

5. Closely liiikcd witli tho fact that many "how's" often 
correspond to oue "what" and many "what's" to one "how," a 
new concept of "form" and "content" arises. The "form" is 
now the enduring and '.'content" (matter) the mutable. This 
cont^-ast shades otf imperceptibly into anothpr distjnct^on, where, 
form is identified with what repeats iin^lf vontinuo\isly in many, 
individnaU, i.e., wit^i tlie '.'common,s" and theii 
with the so-Qalled propcrties of the gencra and the species of 
thinps, while the cont^'iit becomes the uniqne, that which con- 
stitutes the aggregate of particidar rharacteristks. Avhich dift'eren- 
tiate one individual from another one. 

6. In a certain connection with the pair of concepts nnder (4) 
is the between "form" and "content" made with retard 
to two diflFerent "how's," for instance, the cofjnizinp or the 
"presentin^. " People say: what is perceived by the senses (more 
generally: immediately ^iven) is the "form," and what is mentally 
or in some other way assumed on the basis of what was perceived 
is the "content." 

This contrast is not univocal because the expression "perceived 
by the senses" is multivocal. There are many opinions about 
sense perception from the extreme sensualistic one, accordinj? to 
which to perceive sensually means to be passively aflPected by 
"impressions of the senses," to the phenomenolog'ical concept, 
aecordinp: to which a sensual perception is piven when certain 
things endowed with all their qualities are given us in their 
Qorporeal self-presence. In connection with this, the concepts 
Qf "form" and "content" would have to change. In the sensual- 
istic concept "form" means exclusively impressions of the senses 
which we perceive passively and "content" is the thinps »iven us 
in perception (but already the looks of thinjrs holistically ordered 
Qould be considered as "contents"). However, in the phenomeno- 
loorical meaninfr of perception, "form" is the thinp: jriven in per- 
ception. But what should be considered in this case as "content" 
would depend on the particular cases. In one of these, "content"- 
means, for instance, the object presented in a picture (assumed 
by the viewer on the basis of a reeonstruction of the looks of the 
picture), but "form" would be identical in this sense either with 
the canvas of the paintinji covered with varnish or with the colored 
spots on the canvas or with the reconstructed appearance of the 
object presented in the paintinjr : in any case, with one of the 
factors presenting the presented object. Another question would 
be what that presented object is supposed to be, i.e., the "content"' 
in the sense »iven here. But this is a question of the constitutive 
Problem of form and contents which we have distinguished fronv 
the Problem of essence (dealt with here). 

7. A sort of reversal of the former contrast of "form" and 
"content" is a pair of concepts used most often by Neo-Kantians : 
here as "content" is understood somethinp: that is given, found 
(gegeben) ; as "form," somethinjr that is "aimed at" (aufgegeben) 
as the Neo-Kantians .say, namely, that which is to be attained in 
some way, "formed" on the basis of the given. In a certain 
special case, what is sensuously perceived is the "given." What 
was in the former meauing "form" is therefore "content" within 
the present (Neo-Kantian) meaning, while what is supposed on the 
basis of the given, i.e., the "content" within the former (phenome- 
nological) sense is now the object of the "aim" or task, i.e., the 
'■'form" in the present, new meaning, although it differs from 
it conceptually. 

If, however, that something which was "aimed at" has been 
achieved, i.e., "formed" and ready, then it becomes itself a 
"content" and a point of departure for new "tasks," a new 
"form." Thus, what we have here is once more a pair of relative 
concepts, namely, with regard to some phase of the process of 
"forming. " According to the Neo-Kantians this process is in 
principle infinite. Thus everything in this process is in some 
phase "form" and at the time time — from another point of 
view — ' ' content. ' ' 

8. A special case of the former contrast but at the same time 
a certain variety of it is the eonception of the "content" as "stuft'" 
or raw material, i.e., as something which becomes a certain deter- 
mined thing through "work" (or adaptation). The object of 
that creation (the Avork) made out of this raw material is equiva- 
lent to "form." Especially, the work of a certain art created 
by the artist out of a certain material by a certain "adaptation" 
is, according to this eonception, "form." But speaking more 
precisely not so much the work of art itself as the totality of the 
new propertics created by the artist in the stuff whieh it did not 
possess before and which differentiate the work of art fron^ 
*'unformed" (unshaped) "material"" should be considered in this 

» Tlie concept of ' ' material ' ' is also cquivocal. Compare Spör o istnienie 
äwiata," 5 42. 

case as "form." As a result of an easy shift of meanings, form 

is often understood — especially in handicrafts or industrial pro- 

duction — also as the "model" according to which a certain 

number of specimens of a certain type are fabricated. 

9. With the concept of form as the arrangement of the parta 
of a whole and also the form as enduring generic moments 
(aspects) is linked another concept of form often applied in 
discussions: namely, as "form" is understood here, a certain 
regularity which obtains in certain processes or appears in a 
certain set of objects; what is meant here. however, as we shall 
»ee soon is not every regularity but a certain special one. The 
form in this new meaning is not contrasted with "content" but 
rather and more so with a Jach of form. The thing "formed" 
is contrasted with the thing "unshaped." 

Regularity is itself a certain relationship or has its ground 
in relations. To this extent the concept of form now discussed 
approaches the concept of the ordering of the parts of a eertairi 
whole. But in the latter case only parts of a certain wholo were 
considered as the members of relations. while here everything that 
exhibits a certain regularity may constitute a selection of certain 
properties of a process, of a State of aflfairs, etc. On the other 
band, not any arbitrary relations are now considered, because 
there exist also relations where a lark of regularity shows up in 
a certain class of processes or things. Therefore certain appropri- 
ately selerted relations are required if "regularity" is to obtain 
between its elements. But to constitute "form" in the meaning 
now discussed, the regularity in qnestion must be of such a kind 
that owing to its occurrence a mutual afjinity (belonging) must 
be created among those phenomena, events, or processes, so that 
the whole class may assunie a certain unity. It is in thia unifica- 
tion that the "form" eonsists which has its source in regularity. 
Its particular instance important for esthetics is evident in the 
case where the unification of a multiplicity of elements becomes 
an obviously given gestalt (a gostalt ((uality) and a hnrmonious 
gestalt at that, i.e., a gestalt of such a kind that despite all its 
specificity one may feel at its basis a certain multiplicity of 
"harmonized" qualitative moments coniplementing each other. 
This harmonious gestalt is often considered as the "form" of a 
given multiplicity or of the object in which it appears. 

J. PIIILOS.— 11100 

GaUey 11 

As a contrast to tho kind of "fornr' just discussed is opposed 

either (1) h lark of form, shapch^ssiicss, or (2) content. It is 

truo that on tho wholc the eonc-cpt of "content" in the presently 

discussed sense will not be niade precise. But it coulcl be deter- 

mmed in such a way that that which is subject to a certaiu 

reyularity or that which constitutes a certain multiplicity of 

Clements unified by a re-rularity or a harnionious -estalt quality 

Avould be described as the "content."' As a^'ainst this, a lack 

of form or shapelessness occurs first of all where there is na 

re-ularity at all. Deprived of "form" in this sense is what is 

Chaotic,^ accidental. But if in this concept of "form" the aspect 

pf unification and especially of harmonious frestalt has to play 

a decisive role, its opposite is not a simple lack of "form," i.e., of 

re<,'iilarity, but a new positive moment : shapelessness. The lack 

Qt "form" may have, despite everythin«.', a certain rej>ularity 

in t'he baek-round, but only of a sort which does not lead to a 

uniticPtion of a certain multiplicity of moments, and especially 

does not lead to any harmonious -restalt but leads instead to a 

special i->henomenon of shapelessness, of infernal discord, of 

qualitative disoryanization. Betweeu these two extremes the 

harmonious pestalt and the qualitative disoryanization— there is 
a whojV ranjre of "forms" more or tipht or loose, rijrorous 
or free. They all play an important role in esthetic investipations 
and especially where thei-e is a question of various styles in the 
plastic arts as well as in music and in literature. We must 
devote to them the «•reatest attention in the investipation of the 
Hnk between the "form" and the value of a work of art in general 
iind of the liti^^rary woi-k in particular. 

This Synopsis of the important concepts of "form" and 
^'content" convinces us sufficiently how manifold are the phe- 
nomena eovered by these two words. Therefore all assertions 
about the relationship between form and content are impreclse 
phraseolopfy as long as we do not State in which of the senses 
mentioned we talk about the "form" or the "content" respec- 
tively. This is especially relevant coneernin"', among other things, 
the assertion that there is no difference between form and content. 
But on the other band it is not merely an accident that the 
words "form" and "content" (matter) are used in so many 
meanings in everyday spe(>ch and likewise in scientific discussions. 
There are various links and relations between those "forms" and 
also between the " content s" in the sense distinguished above. 
If these relations are not clearly noticed, then the borderline be- 
tween the various meanings becomes blurred. I cannot go into 
this here.i" But it is necessary to use the terms "form" and 

1" I (lid it in Vol. II of " fspör o istnienie swiata, ' ' Cliaiiter VIII. 
"content" or "matter," respectively, only for some meanings 
contrasted höre and designate the remaining ones with other 
expressions. I preserve the term "form" in this sense only in two 
cases: (1) Form-1 in the sense of categorial form which is radi- 
cally non-qualitative and which contains everything qualitative 
in the broadest sense of this word. I am opposing to Form-1 
matter-1 to designate the qualitative faetor in the object in the 
broadest sense of this word. (2) Form -2 in the sense of a 
"determinator" of something eise, i.e., in the sense of Aristotelian 
form; to it .should be opposed not "pure matter," which is at best 
a limiting concept, but matter-2 in the of a certain special 
categorial form, namely, the suhjcct of properties to which form-2 
in the Aristotelian sense belongs. (3) Instead of "form" I speak 
about an arramjcmcnt of the parts of a certain whole " and oppose 
"It would be possible to use in tliis case tlie tcrni "structuro" but the 
many meanings obaracterizing tlic use of tlüs tem by modern psyehologists 
constitute a dnngcr. 

to it not "matter" but a selection of the parts of this whole. 
(4) In opposing "what" and "how" I speak in the first case 
about the ohjcct (thing, pröcess, event) which exists or with 
which something happens and in the second case about the mode 
in which something exists, occurs or is presented, etc. (5) In- 
stead of "form" I speak about the endiiring moments or factors 
of some object and instead of "matter" or "content" I speak 
about the mutable factors of this object. Similarly, I speak about 
generic moments or the moments of the speries and oppose to 
them the particular ones, the individual or individualizing ones. 
(6) In opposing the sensually perceived moments to those repre- 
senting something eise, I speak not about "form," but simply 
about the preseniational faetor, and oppose to it "the presented 
ohjeet." It would be also possible in this case to .speak about 
"exterior form" and "interior content" especially if it is a 
question of Avork of art— whether plastic or literary. In the 
same way one could call "internal content" that which is 
expressed by the sensually perceivable faetor — regardless of 
whether we have in mind some psychical state or property of the 
author of the work or the so-called "idea" of the work. (7) The 
Neo-Kantian of "form" and "matter"— which should 
be terminologically preserved within the ränge of the Neokantian 
System— may be completely left out '- in esthetic discu.ssions. But 

12 But it wa.s ai.plied in an intoresting way to the process of the creation 
of «orks of art. Conipare .1. Kleiner, "Content and Form in Poetry" 
(Trew i forma w poezji), Przcglqd Warsawski (War.saw Review), Warsäw 
1923. ' 

if in Creative there were a transition from what is 
"given" [gegeben) to what is "aimed at" (aufgegeben), then it 
would be better to preserve these terms and not to use "form" 
and "content" (matter). (8) I do not see why the work of art 
as the residt of creative processes should be called "form," 
especially since it is not known whether in the creative process 
we always have to do with "forming" in the sense of "shaping" 
of some stuff (raw material). Only in .sculpture and architec- 
ture does such a concept of the creative process seem to be 
justified in a certain measnre, because it is there that the artist 
really finds a certain raw material which nuist be "adajited'" in 
some way to get a finished work of art. But in literature, in 
musie, and in painting the creative process is something more 
and something eise than the mere "forming" of an existing stuff; 
it is especially impossible in music or literature to speak of a 
"stuff" as an existing "material" in the same .sense as in sculp- 
ture, for instance. But even where we have to do with it at the ■ 
Start, we cannot consider it as a "content" or a "material" of the 
work itself. Only the confusion of the function of "determining" 
characteristic of form-2, the Aristotelian one, with the ".shaping" 
of some existing material by the artist could have caused the 
use of the word "matter" for the "stuff" or the "raw material." 
(9) If it is a question of "form" in the sense of a "regularity 
of a special kind leading to the unification of a certain multi- 
plicity of phenomena or elements, nothing prevents ns from using 
in this ease the word "regularity." It is advisable to avoid the 
word "form" where it is a question of a harmonious gestalt 
A\hieh becomes appareiit in the work owiiig to a certain regularity 
luddi-n behind it, between its moments or elements. If it is a 
question, however, of the conneetion existing between the regu- 

J. PIIILOS.— 11109 

Galloy 13 

larity among tlie elemenfs of tho work aiul thc harmonious j^estalt, 
then this coiinection could be (lesi<j:iiatt'd by the hitlicrto oftoii 
used term of "interior form," thus fixiiig the ineaninj.' of this 
expression whieh has beeii used thus far very cquivoeally and 
luiclearly. 1 shall try to confer oii this term another meaniiijj;. 

Havintr fixod in this way the concept of "form" and "content" 
in «ieneral, 1 can now begin to discuss the constitutive problem 
of form and content. I shall do this by applyinj; it to the literary 
work, so as to produce an awareness of what is "form"' and \vhat 
is "content" for literary art in the various listed meaninjrs. 

This will be facilitated by the circumstance that there exists 
among: literary scholars a certain— not very consistent — practice 
of considerinpr various eomponents of the literary work sometimes 
as its "form" and sometimes as its "content." I shall try to 
make this usage more precise, or, rather, to replace it by a ränge 
of precise Solutions of the constiutive problem of form and content. 

Roman Ingarden 

University of Cracow 














^ f 


J. PHILOS.-1H09 


Galley 13 

HUXDREDS of pages have ajready been written about the 
ditt'erencc between legal and moral norms. Some authors 
have Seen the difference in their external form, others in their 
content, some in their origin, others in the cireumstances under 
which they are binding, or iu sanetions applied to thosc \\ho, 
did not conform themselves to their commands. One of these 
numerous proposals will be discussed here. It seems particularly 
attractive and has been largely accepted, not only by jurists but 
§Jso by social anthropologists studying legal institutions in primi- 
tive socieljies, Th^s proposal had been advocated and treated in, 
t^e mosif e^^Jiaustive way by L. Petrazycki, whose works have 
been recently translated into English.* Petrazycki was professor 
i Leon Petrazycki, Law and Moralit.v, tr. by II. \V. Babb (Haivaid Univ. 
Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1955). 

at the University of Warsaw from 1917 until his death in 1931. 
l\ was there that the present author attended his lectures with 
ß, number of other students attracted by his fame as a Jurist 
and moral scientist. 

According to Petrazycki, moral norms are norms which 
command without authorizing anybody to claim the deed com- 
manded, while legal norms are not unilaterally binding but 
give to others a right to claim the fulfillment of the norm. The 
former are only imperative, while the latter have an imperative- 
attributive character. This characterization, as the author ex- 
plains, is not to be treated as a description of the existing division 
of roles in the domain of morality on the one band, and law on 
the other, but it constitutes a proposal for a demarcation line. 
This proposal is not a purely conventional one, but it grasps the 
very nature of law, which has, as yet, not been adequately 
characterized by theorists. It is only this distinction which makes 
it possible to formulate adequate theories concerning either moral- 
ity or law, i.e., theories which embrace all the objects belonging, 
to the characterized class and refer to these objects excliisively. 

As mentioned above, this theory is widely known and widely 
accepted. Referring to Petrazycki, the German Jurist, G. 
Radbruch accepts the former 's distinction as one of the differences 
between morality and law. "The legal obligor," as he writes 
in his studies on legal philo.sophy, "is ahvays confrontcd with 
an obligee, an interested claimant, whereas to the moral duty 
such an obligee is attached only as a symbol when it is called 
a duty toward one 's own conscience, toward humanity in one 's 
own person, toward one 's better seif. In the field of law one 
may talk of duty as an Obligation that is owed; but the moral 
duty is not thus owed to a creditor, but is a duty pure and 
simple." 2 G. del Vecchio in his article, "Homo juridicus," treats 

2 The Legal Phüosophies of Lask, Radbruch and Dabin, tr. by Kurt Wilk 
(Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1950), p. 81. 

this distinction as firmly established. "L'imperatif juridique," 
he writes, "a ceci de particulier par rapport a l'imperatif moral, 
qu'il fait naitre un devoir dans un sujet a l'egard d'un autre 
sujet, et celui-ci, par cet acte meme, acquiert la faculte d'exiger 
que ce devoir soit rempli. ' ' ^ 

3 This article has been published in the collection Droit, Marale, Moeurt 
(Ed. Sirey, Paris, 1936), pp. 1-20. The quoted passage is on p. 3. 

This distinction, clear and convincing at first sight, can be 
interpreted in different ways, and each of these interpretations, 
as we shall endeavor to show, encounters difficulties that are not 
easy to overeome. We shall examine them successively, referring. 
to the writings of Petrazycki and especially to his book on the 
"Motives of Human Conduct," published in German in 1907* 

«"Ueber die Motive des Handelns und über das Wesen der Moral und 
des Rechts," 1907. 

and incorporated in an abridged form in the collection recently 
publLshed in English. 

According to the first Interpretation, a norm like "Honor 
thy father and thy mother" would be legal for X if X considered 
not only that people are under the Obligation of honoring their 
parents, but also that parents are entitled to require it as some- 
thing due to them. To be entitled to require is, in other words, 
to have the right to do so or, in still other words, to make justified 
Claims. In fact, in Petrazycki 's writings we find on many 
occasions a distinction of justified and unjustified Claims, reason- 
able and unreasonable demands. It would be absurd, in hia 
opinion, to Interpret the rule: "Resist not evil. Whoever shall 
smite thee on thy right cheek turn to him the other also; and 
if any man will sue thee at law and take away thy shirt, let him 
have thy cloak also," as a bilateral rule giving to the offender 
the right to smite the left cheek or the right to obtain the clbak. 
Although it would be less absurd to treat the Obligation of 
humility, chastity, and perfection as bilateral, the obligations 
formulated in the New Testament are generally unilateral and 
do not allow one to claim from anybody the fulfillment of its Ideals. 

All those writers who accept Petrazycki 's distinction of law 
and morality also accept his di.stinction of absurd and reason- 
able Claims. The social anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski 
adopts, as what he calls the anthropological definition of law, the 
following formula: "The rules of law stand out from the rest in 
that they are feit and regarded as the obligations of one person 
and the rightful claims of another."' It is, according to him, 

5 "Crime and Ciistom in Ravage Society" (London, 1932), p. 55. 

the only definition which gives an adequate idea of the function 
of law in a primitive .society. 

The use of expressions like: "rightful" or "valid Claims" 
seems very dangerous for the definition, since a claim is rightful 
or valid ahvays in reference to some rules which are tacitly 
assumed. When somebody holds that parents may not reqnest to 
be honored by their children or that nobody can claim humility 
from other people, this "cannot" does not constitute a technical 
impossibility, like the impossibility of being in two different places 
at the same time. "Cannot" means here: "is in disagreoment 
with a rule treated as .self-evident. " Bentham already knew very 
well that the notion of valid claims or rights implied the existence 
of rules of a higher order. Although he sympathized with the 
spirit of the "Declaration" of the Freneh Revolution, he could 
not agree with its form, since the notion of rights, involving a 
reference to rules, could not, in his opinion, be used as the 
starting point. 

Petrazycki does not u.sually support by any argument his 
opinion that a claim in a given case is not valid. Rather excep- 
tionally, when treating the Obligation of humility, chastitv, and 
perfection as unilateral, he points to th.> prejndicial conscqucncos 
of entitling people to such claims. Claims of this kiiul would make 
pcaccful conditions impossiblc withiii a society. the morc so as 
people are inclined to dcmand of their neighbors much more 
than they dcmand of themselves. Thus in this case Petrazycki 
thinks it unreasonable to claim humility or perfection from people 

J. PHILOS.— 11109 

Galley 14 

in view of the tacitly assumed principle of avoidinjr conflicts 
between members of a society. A principle of this or of some 
other kind is always to be found in the arpuments of those who 
consider a claim valid or not. And then the question immediately 
arises: is this nile of reference moral or lepal ? This question can 
be answered only by recurrinpr to new principles, necessary for 
decidinpr whether it is unilateral or bilateral, i.e., connected with 
valid Claims or not. Thus we find ourselves involved in a 
regressus which leads us to infinity, or to a point where, having 
no more rules of a higher order to refer to, we cannot apply the 
distinction of moral and legal rules any more. 

Let me know, one could say, which claims are valid and which 
are not, according to your opinion, and it will prive me an idea 
of the ethics you advocate, the distinction of valid and invalid 
Claims being symptomatic of people's moral attitudes. He who 
thinks that chastity cannot be requested frora others reveals either 
that, according to him, chastity does not always deserve approval, 
or that we cannot interfere in the private life of cur neighbors 
and that everybody may dispose of bis own person as he likes. 
He who holds that humility cannot be a matter of claim manifests 
his opinions on what should be the proper relations of man to man. 
A person approving of a social hierarchy, like the hierarchy of 
a caste System, would probably have a different view of the subject. 
The decision, whether the norm, "Honor thy father and thy 
mother," is legal or moral, would, in conformity with Petrazycki's 
criteria, depend on the opinion whether symmetrical relations of 
love and friendship are not preferable in family life to asym- 
metrical ones, and on the opinion whether the very fact of giving 
birth to their children entitles parents to claim an attitude of 
respect which can be due only for personal merits. And \vhoever 
treats the claim to smite the other check as absurd confesses that 
the idea contradicts his fundamental concepts of human dignity. 
The use of the concept of valid claim does not necessarily 
involve a reference to moral principles. In judging a claim 
absurd or unreasonable, people may refer also to legal rules, 
rules of custom, or technical principles. Thus, e.g., he who deniea 
the right of parents to be honored may refer to the fact that 
emotions are spontaneous and cannot be feit on command. But 
the very fact that the concept of a valid claim usually implies 
reference to moral or legal norms renders the use of this concept 
impossible in the definition of law. 

Let US now consider another Interpretation of the concept of 
valid Claim, which can also be derived from Petrazycki's writings 
as well as from the writings of those theorists who share his 

According to Petrazycki, the fact that moral norms are only 
imperative, while legal ones are imperative and attributive, is not 
necessarily expressed in the formal structure or the content of a 
norm, since norms usually have an elliptical form. The distinction 
is ultimately a psychological one, and it is impossible to class a 
norm either as legal or as nloral, without knowing the state of 
mind of the person who makes use of it, the norm being legal 
when connected with a bilateral ' ' impulsion, ' ' " and moral when 
8 The Word "impulsion" used in tlie Englisli translation of Petrazycki's 
vritings wliich vas nientioiicd abovc, correspoiids to tlie Polisli "eniocja 
which denotes a particular state of mind of a passive-active nature. 
[A feeling. — Editor.] 
the impulsion is only unilateral. 

By adopting this psychological point of view, we may give a 
different Interpretation to the concept of a valid claim: a claim 
can be considered valid not with reference to certain principles 
but with reference to some söcio-psychological fact, namely, the 
fact of being widely experienced in the given group. In this 
case, a norm recommendinji action A would be legal when used 
by X if X feit not only an Obligation to per form A, but also the 
pressure of claims on the part of his fellow-men, these claims 
being sufüciently widely shared to be treated as justified and not 
as matter of individual cäprice. This reference to claims as 
social facts gives to the psychological definition of Petrazycki a 
certain stability, since the person obliged has his counterpart in 
another person, not imafSrinary but real, who requires the action 
recommended by the norm and is in his claims supported by 
other members of the group. Petrazycki himself often interpreted 
his distinction in that way, e.g., when he was stressing the pressure 
of social Claims upon the mind of individuals or when he de- 
scribed the social evolution of norms. Whenever people became 
eonscious of their rights, whenever, according to Petrazycki's 
expression, their mind freed itself from servitude, unilateral 
norms were transformed into bilateral ones, a social process which 
he considered not only as evolution but also as progress. 

By interpreting in this way the distinction of legal and moral 
norms, we avoid the danger of defining valid claims by referring 
to norms of a higher order. But since the validity of claims is 
here ascertained by their very existence, the notion of claim 
itself must be clear enough to enable us to decide Avhether in a 
given case we have to do with a claim of this sort or not. This 
notion was not so important when the claim could only be imagined 
and when the only thing which mattered was whether it was 
considered valid, from the point of view of certain assumed 
principles. Now it can be valid only when real and commonly 

The notion of claim is certainly not simple, and what seems 
particularly interesting to a moral scientist is to clarify its relation 
to moral disapproval. Does not any claim contain a potential 
disapproval, in case it is not complied with 1 And does not any 
moral disapproval imply a claim ? He who claims from his em- 
ployer a two-weeks leave after a year of hard work will disapprove 
of the refusal. Inversely, does not he who disapproves of hia 
friend, who has deserted his wife and children, claim a different 
behavior? For some theorists, e.g., E. Westermarck, moral dis- 
approval is always an expression of resentment, and the concept 
of resentment seems very closely related to that of claim. 

These questions being as yet unanswered, the denotation of 
the term "claim" must be treated as rather vague. It is a well- 
known fact that every frustrated expectation, e.g., an expectation 
due simply io hahif, can give rise to claims. A child who is 
accustomed to being kissed by his mother when going to bed 
experiences a resentful claim, when his mother, absorbed by guests, 
forgets to perform her "duty." Everybody knows that a favor, 
regularly bestowed, gives rise to claims on the part of the bene- 
ficiary, and the "impulsions" of the benefactor, unilateral at 
first, can in course of time easily take an imperative-attributive 
form. Unilateral norms, sufficiently integrated by habit in the 
minds of people belonging to a group, are usually transformed 
into bilateral ones. This fact explains why, as the example of 
Petrazycki shows, it is not easy to ((uote instances of unilateral 
norms. They always seem bilateral when they are really binding, 
and in order to find cxaniples of unilateral norms we must turn 
either to norms which have never bccn treated as binding, as it 

J. PHILOS.— 11109 

Galley 15 

is the case of the norm which recommends us to oflfer the other 
cheek, or to norms which have been bindin? in the past but 
nowadays are treated rather as obsolete, as is the norm "Honor 
thy mother and thy father" in those countries where mntual 
love and comradeship has replaced a hierarehical structure of the 

family. , . , 

Thus, if the existence of widely experienced Claims is decisive 
for incluü'inp the ^iven norm in the class of lepal norms. among 
the really binding norms, practically nothin? is left to morality. 
Even the norm recommendinj? love of one's neiprhbor, always 
quoted as a typical example of a unilateral norm, can in some 
gases be bilatei-al, as, e.jr., in the case of maternal love. People 
disapprove of a mother who does not love her child. The child 
can Claim her warm attention, and the mother herseif can feel 
guilty of disappointinp: these claims, which she considers valid. 

Let US sum up our criticism. As a psycholopist. Petrazycki 
in principle treats the difPerence between imperative and 
imperative-attributive oblip;ations as based upon a distinction in 
the correspondin«? " impulsions. " Whenever X deems himself 
obliged to perform action A, and thinks of A as owed to another 
pers'on, bis Obligation is legal, as, e.g., when he pays the agreed 
wages to his servant. Whenever he does not consider his Obliga- 
tion as due to somebody, his Obligation is moral, as is usually 
the case in giving alms. In this form the distinction of legal 
and moral rules does not seem operational, since we have ahvays to 
inquire what is the State of mind of the person who makes use 
of the norm, and it may easily happen that the same norm, 
recommended by the same person, is moral at one time and legal 

at another. 

It is probably the need to make the distinction more steady 
and more predictable which leads Petrazycki to introduce the 
additional condition that the claim be valid and to reject all un- 
reasonable and absurd claims. Even when he does not speak 
quite explicity of validity, although he often does, this condition 
is feit to be latent in his distinction, while it is introduced 
expressis verbis into the definition of law by B. Malinowski who, 
as quoted above, speaks of rightful claims. 

Taking into account this additional condition, we faced two 
possibilities of its Interpretation, neither of them free from 
difficulties. If a claim is rightful, or even only seems rightful, 
with reference to some norms, we are engaged in a regress. If a 
Claim is rightful in virtue of the fact that it is widely shared, 
only those norms which are obsolete or have never been binding 
are left to morality, since all norms really accepted in society 
seem assoeiated with claims. 

We should like to conclude these remarks with some historical 
considerations. The distinction between legal and moral norms, 
as discussed above, has been usually assoeiated with the name of 
Petrazycki, who undoubtedly was the first to develop it at length 
and made out of it the basic difference between morality and law. 
But germs of this distinction are to be found already among 
18th-century writers who opposed charity to justice, considering 
that the first cannot be required from anybody, while the second 
is subject to claims. This distinction, treated as a distinction 
within the domain of morality, was later discussed in the fifth 
chapter of J. S. Mill's "Utilitarianism." In that chaper Mill 
dwells upon the concept of justice in connection with the principle 
of Utility. When referring to a distinction of duties of perfect 
and imperfect obligations he writes as follows: 

Duties of perfect Obligation are tliose duties in virtue of wliicli a correlative 
r'jjlit reaides in ao'me person or perlioiia; dufiea of imperTect obUgatlon are 
tliose moral obligations whicli do not give birth to any riglit. ... I tliink it 
will be found that this distinction exactly coincides with that whicli exists 
between justice and the other obligations of morality. . . . It seems to nie 
that this fcature in the case — a riglit in some person, correlative to the moral 
Obligation— constitutcs the specific difference between justice and goncrosity 
or beniflcence. Justice iniplies something which is not only riglit to do, and 
wrong not to do, but which some individual person can claim from us as his 
moral right.^ 

7 (Everyman's Library), p. 46. 

This distinction, as we mentioned before, and is as obvious from 
the passage quoted, is for Mill a distinction of two kinds of moral 
rules. But the rules of justice are, according to him, connected 
with law. The term "just," as he shows, is derived from 
"iussum," i.e., "that which has been ordered," and is in diflPerent 
languages related to law, while conformity to law is the primitive 
Clement in the formation of the notion of justice. Thus the 
characteristic of rules of justice can be considered as a character- 
istic of rules of law, which makes the analogy with Petrazycki 's 
distinction still more evident. Later in the same chapter Mill 
tries to explain what is a right. "When we call anything a 
person 's right, we mean that he has a valid claim on society to 
Protect him in the possession of it, either by the force of law or 
by that of education and opinion." If somebody should ask, 
why society ought to support this claim, Mill confesses to be able 
to give no other reason than general Utility. The claim, as we see, 
is addressed here, in his opinion, not to an individual but to 


There is a further analogy between Mill and Petrazycki which 
deserves attention : both agree in attributing peculiar importance 
to bilateral rules. Rules of justice form "the most sacred and 
binding form of all morality," writes Mill in the same chapter, 
and "Justice is a name of certain classes of moral rules, which 
concern the essentials of human being more nearly." Petrazycki 
makes a comparison of moral rules to Champagne, while legal 
rules are compared to water — to goose wine, as he used to say. 
They are much more useful in the life of society and endowed 
with a miu'h greater motivational force. Thus the conversion of 
moral consciousness into a legal one ahvays constitutes an important 
Step forward. 

The difficulties encountered in Petrazycki 's characterization 

of law and morality do not diminish the respeet due to all his 

valuable contributions in these domains. In both of them he 

combated with great energy and success all possible forms of 

fiction. This makes him a successor of Bentham, whose tracking 

of fictions in morality and law only now begins to be sufficiently 


Maria Ossowski 
















j. pniLOS.— ii:'09 

Galley 16 


• This paper is a bü glitly abridged translatioii by tlie special editor from 
tlie Polisli oriKiiial i» ^ •f*' Filozoficina, 19r)5, Xo. 4. Tlic autlior refers in 
tlie hegiiiniiig to artifle of liis deidiiig with the sanie suhject : "Tlie 
Principle of Contradicti'oii in tlic Liglit of Dialwtioal Logic (U.vvf 
Wspolczcsna, 1946, No. 3-4). The autlior avers that lie cliaiiged lii» former 
staiidiioint. Tlie present articlc cutails a criticiam of the former oue and an 
e^pressiou of this changt'. 

. . . The questiou of the interpretation of movement and 
change on the basis oi M arxist dialectics and alonp with it that 
of its relation to the lojjrieal prineiple of non-contradietion has a 
lonp: history. Here are the roots of the thesis of the allejied 
i'ontradiction between diak' ctics and formal lofric. If tlie dialec 
tieal interpretation of mov ement were to result in th(> nejration 
of the prineiple of lojii<.'al non-contradietion, this would be tanta- 
mount to the denial of tbe v alidity of formal lo<«ie, a contradietion 
between the theses of diale ctics and of formal lopic. 

Dialectics explains the srenesis of movement and development 
by the strufTfrle between th-e internal opposites proper to all thing's 
and phenomena. This is cx:pressed by the prineiple of the unity 
and eonflict of opposites. The latter — a basic prineiple of 
dialectics — allefredly disaf«:re<?s with the lopical prineiple of contra- 
dietion beeause, accordinjr to the well-known assertions of Hejiel 
and of the classics of Marxism, movement is an objective contra- 
dietion. Thus dialectics al\ef;edly impairs the pieneral validity 
of the logical prineiple of non-contradietion and alonp: with it of 
the prineiple of excluded middle (as both of them may be 
converted into each other accordin» to the law of de Morfran). 

It would seem that this standpoint is uneqnivocally stated in 
Marxist literature, as quotations from Marx, Engels, and Lenin 
mijrht show. But if we investiprate more closely the relationship 
of the classics (of Marxism) to the prineiple of contradietion, the 
Problem complicates itself. 

There are a number of parapfraphs, for instance, in Enpels' 
"Anti-Dühring," where Enf?els combats the standpoint of meta- 
physics — in the Marxist sens.e of this word — and states that there 
is an inherent contradietion in every thing and every phenomenon 
which has an objective eb.aracter. But in the paragraph . . . 
where he shows that a thing may be itself and simultaneously 
somethinp- eise, he takes a negative position toward logieal contra- 
dietion in a train of thought. Thus Engels writes here . . . that 
so-called common sense beeomes entangled in insoluble contra- 
dictions. . . . Elsewhere (in the same book) he criticizes the 
System of Hegel beeause of its internal contradictions : "The 
System of Hegel . . . suffered also from incttrahlc contra- 
dictions. ..." In both cases contradietion is deprecated as 
inadmissible, as is shown by the expressions "insoluble," 
"ineurable." Such examples eould be multiplied. 

If we want to eomprehend the real relations of the classics 
of Marxist dialectics to the prineiple of contradietion, Ave must 
follow up hoAv they make use of it in the course of reasoning, thus 
tacitly aeknowledging its validity. If someone proves suecessfully 
that an Opponent contradicts himself or is compelled to adopt a 
conclusion contrary to his own premisses, then the fallacionsness 
of his argumentation is proved. This method of rebuttal is often 
used in the works of the classics of Marxism. But this implies 
the validity of the prineiple of contradietion. Thus in his werk 
"Anarchism or Socialism?" Stalin castigates the anarohists who 
reproach Marxist dialectics for being a variety of the theories of 
cataclysms of Cuvier but who affirm at tho same time that Marxism 
is based on Darwinism and takes an uneritical stand toward it. . . . 
"Cuvier denies Darwinian evolution," Stalin says, "and ac- 
knowledges only cataclysms . . . but Darwin denies the cataclysms 
of Cuvier and aeknowledges gradual evolution. ..." Stalin 
obviously reproaehes his oppoiu'iits with contradietion in reasoning 
and holds that this proves the fallaciousness of the reasoning in 

This method of proof is so frequent and customary in the works 
of the classics that it might seem trivial to mention it. But it may 
also be trivial to stress that a Marxist judge, eonfronted with the 
declaration of a defendant that he was and at the same time was 
not at home on the night in (piestion, would not consider this 
contradietion as a reflection of the objective contradictions 
inherent in reality itself but as a proof that the defendant is 
lying. Trivial as such faets may be, they will be helpful in the 
course of our reasoning. 

Dialectics asserts the objeetiA-e eharacter of contradictions, 
but nevertheless Marxism rejects logical contradictions in thinking. 
The classics of Marxism eondemn the narrowness of metaphysical 
thought with its scheme "either-or" and often show the necessity 
of replacing it by "and-and," and in doing so they seem to attack 
the validity of the prineiple of contradietion. But they affirm it 
in other instances and assert even explieitly that the scheme 
"either-or" is not metaphysical in itself or always erroneous. . . . 
There are cases wheii it is eorrect. "Either the vietory of revolu- 
tion or the vietory of counter-revolution," said Lenin, "either 
twenty years of appropriate policies toward the peasants or the 
downfall of the work of revolution for a long time." 

Dialectics undoubtedly aeknowledges the validity of the 
ciples of contradietion and excluded middle at least to 
extent, although it seems to limit their importanee. But 
actually are the limitations allegedly imposed by dialectics? 
hackneyed answer is to the effect that those principles are valid 
when we analyze objects in a state of rest or inertia but lose their 
validity if we analyze movement or change. This is supposed to 
be due to the objective contradictions inherent in movement, in 
objects undergoing change. This answer is based on some para- 
graphs in the works of Engels (especially from " Anti-Dühring"). 
This eoneeption was also advocated by Plekhanov in a close-knit 
theory. He supports a dual logic : a formal logie (that observes 
the prineiple of contradietion), indispensable for the analysis of 
States of rest of bodies; and a dialeetieal logic (rejecting the 
prineiple of contradietion), "the logic of contradictions" in the 
idiom of Plekhanov, indispensable for the analysis of movement 
and development. According to Plekhanov the logie of inertia 
(i.e., formal lopic) would be a special case of a higher logie, the 
dialeetieal kind, just as. e.p., Euclidean geometry is a special 
instance of a higher. noji-Euelidean geometry. (Cf. G. V. 
Plekhanov, "Fundamental Problems of Marxism.") 





On the Meanivß of the Word "Contradietion** 
in Marrist Philoxophy 

Let US begin with those cases when Marxism rejects a contra- 
dietion as something faiilty . . . sometliing not groinuied in the 
objective properties of things but in a subjective error. One 
cannot say at the same time that Marxists are and are not the 
supporters of the cataclysms of Cuvier. . . . Th(> assert ion that 
Napoleon died and did not die is absurd, being contradictory. 

J. PIIILOS.— 11109 

Galley 17 

This applies also to the statoment of the dofciulant who says that 
he was und was not at home ou the crufial iii^ht. . . . We eould 
sumniarize all this in sayinp: that a eoiijuiK-tiun of two eoiitra- 
dietory sciileiiees . . . is rejccted as false aud that a coiitradiction 
in this seiisc is inadmissible. 

Jn all such eases "contradietion" as iised in Marxist literature 
. , . is stricto sensu lo<i:ical and referred to as "contradietion" 
in lopieal literature. Biit tiiis is not the oidy meanin«,' of the 
Word in Marxist writinjis. There . . . we find other meanings 
of this term equivalent to "the unity of opposites." 

The prineiple of the nuity and tlie confliet of opposites is the 
centi'al thesis of dialeeties as it aims at clarifyinj,' the source of 
movement and develojjnient, their meehanism. Every thinjr and 
phenomenon is a unity of opposites. In this dialeetical thesis the 
tenn "eontradietion" has a ditferent meaninj-' than in \()'/\c. The 
dialeetical prineiple aflirnis that objeets and i)lienoniena have a 
polar structure, as concrete investijration of a <iiven objeet shows ; 
that the stru?:^le of eonfiictin<.' forees and tendeneies in all thinj>s 
and phenoniena is the source of movement, of chanjie, and of 
development. The relationship of these "opposites," i.e., of those 
poles of strnjrfrlinjr forees and tendeneies, is also ealled "contra- 
dietion" in Marxist literature. But there is a g'reat vacillation 
... in the use of such terms as "opposites," "eontradition," 
"unity of opposites," and even sometimes "unity of contra- 
dictions," a vacillation all the more danjjerous because of the 
disren^ard of the ditferenee between "contradietion" in the 
dialeetical aiid in the lop'ical sense. 

The root of these terminolojjical diffieulties may be traced back 
to the works of Ileprel. Even a eursory look at his "Lofjic" shows 
that he was not aware of the difference between the meaninpr of 
"contradietion" in the lojiical prineiple of contradietion and in 
the relationship of "opposites" pointed to above. But the 
dialeetical prineiple of the unity of opposites does not sanction the 
lojiieal contradictions. Thus, the Statement that a ma<>:net has a 
north and a sonth pole, or the Statement that the nucleus of the 
atom has a positive charge but that its periphery consists of 
nejratively charged electrons, is not ineompatible with the (logical) 
prineiple of eontradietion since we do not say that the mapnet 
has and has not a north pole; that there is and is not positive 
electricity in the atoms. . . . 

We have sifjnalized the eqnivoeal meaning: of the term 
"dialeetical contradietion." It deals . . . sometimes with the 
polar structure of an ob.iect ; in other cases — and these are the 
most interestinfr ones — with the strugglc of opposccl forees linked 
with the polar structure of the objeet. This is a classical example 
of the unity and strujrsjle of opposites (e.p., the strug^prle of 
the bour^eoisie and of the Proletariat as the motive force of the 
development of capitalist society). Finally, sometimes the Opposi- 
tion between different aspects of an ob.iect whieh is investif-ated 
from various viewpoints may be in question : a develoi)in5J: orjianism 
is the same with refrard to its complex structure but different if we 
consider its metabolism ; the parliamentary system is progressive 
in a given period but contains in niice «lerms of backwardness. 
When we formulate the prineiple of the unity of opjiosites, we 
merely state the struirple of o|)i)osin<j tendeneies. the complex, 
polar structure of thinjrs and phenoniena, or the contrariness of 
aspects of an objeet investiprated in various respects; but in eaeh 
and every one of these cases we ean and should talk in a manner 
free from lo<;ical contradictions. IIe<j:el did not notiee that very 
many meanin^s of the word "eontradietion" were involved ; hence 
his errors concerninp: formal lofric. That IIe<rel conceives "contra- 
dietion" as a unity of opposites is evident from the foUowing 
passaj^e : 

In inve.stijj.'iting tlio iiature of contradietion we rcaoli in general tlie 
conclusion that if it is possii)lc' to uncovtr contradictions in one thing or 
anotlicr, tlien tliis is per sc no dcfcct or flaw of that tliing. On tlie contrary, 
evory doterniination, every concrete thing, every concept is in its cssence a 
unity of various and distingui.shaljle nioments. [Hegel, Works, Vol. V: Logic. 
Moscow, 1937, Russian edition, \>. 523.] 

Ilere contradietion is clearly defined as unity of opposites. 
The examples of contradictions found in Ilepel (, the positive 
and negative pole of the mahnet, positive and negative electricity, 
the centripetal and centrifugal forees aetive in the motions of the 
planets, above and below, father and son, etc.) have rarely any- 
thinjr to do with logieal contradietion sensu stricto. 

The word "contradietion" in the sense of unity and strugglc 
of opposites is evident in the essay of Lenin "About Dialeeties." 
This is an elaboration of the thonght that contradietion is the 
unity of opposites (a unity of controdictorif parts). Stalin de- 
fined contradietion espressis rerhis as unity and confliet of op- 
posites in the work "On Dialeetical and Ilistoricnl Matcrialisni" : 

As ngninst metaphysics, dialeeties presuities that inlirnnl rnntrailirlions 
nre contained in the ohjects of nature, in tlie phenoniena of iiature, lieeause 
all olijeits nnd jihenonieMa of nature have a negative and a positive side, .1 
past and a future, Clements of obsoleseence and of development, and that the 
gtrtifiplr of thrsr oppositr.s, the struggle between old and new, between wliat 
dies and wliat is borii, lietv.een what decays and what develops, is the internal 
content of the process of development, tlie internal content of the traiisfonna- 
tion of the quantitative clianges into qnalitativc ones. (Stalin: "(juestious 
of Leninisni," Wnrsaw, 1949, Vol. I, p. 338, "Ksiazka i Wiedza."] 

Marxist literature emjjloys "contradietion" in still another sense. 
We speak about contradictions in prineiple of the capitalist system, 
of elass contradictions in eapitalism, of the internal contradictions 
in the system of Hegel. This sense differs from those mentioned 
above. Thus Marx writes : 

In a certain jitiase of development the forees of materinl production of 
«oeiety get into a contradietion to the existing forms of jirodiietion or — what 
is its legal exprcssion — to the pro|ierty relations among whieh tliey developcd 
thus far. Tliesc relations now change from forms of development of i)roductive 
forees into being their ehains. Tlien foUows the iieriod of social revolntion. 
[Marx, Selected Works, Vol. I, p. 3.'!S: On Critique of Economy, Preface, 
Warsaw, l!»t!). "Ksiazka i Wiedza."] 

Ilere "contradietion" does not mean (as in logic) the relation 
of an artirmative to a negative judgment, nor does the writer 
aseribe eontradictory properties to an objeet. By "eontradietion" 
we me.m here not only the struggle of opposed tendeneies as the 
motive force of social development within a given social order, 
but in addition that the produetive forees of society are unable to 
fundion within the existing relations of production; that an 
inconipatthililif has arisen between the produetive forees and the 
relations of production so tluit the social meehanism is unable to 
funetion properly ; that the social system collapses as a resnit of 
oi)posed t<'ndencies aetive within it. The "internal contradictions 
of the social system" mean here the state of malad justment, of 
incompatibility. of llie parts of the social meehanism. If we speak 
about "eonfradilion"" between the method and the system of the 
philosophy of Hegel, we have in mind the incompatil)ility betweeu 
the dialeetical method aud absolute idealism. ... ' 

J, PHILOS— 11109- 

Galley 18, 

But do vre pet into aiiy conflict with formal logic . . . and 
e^pecially with its principle of contradiction, when acknowledping 
the contradictions of the sort , enumerated above? Obviously not, 

As a result we may safely State . . . that there is no dis-" 
agreement between the dialectical principle of the unity and the . 
struggle of opposites as the source of movement and development, 
and the principle of logical non-contradiction. But one . . . 
question whieh was central in the relation between dialectics and 
logic should still, [be,,(i^ciii,'^sedt t^e well-known assertion.of Hege)^. 
and of the classics of Marxist dialectics that "movement itself is 
a contradiction" and t^t an adequate description of a moviug 
body req,uires tJjie u^e o^ oontradictory sentences. 

Movement and the Question of Objective Contradiction 
Engels stetes ^ 

As long as we ^observe tiiings in a state of rest and inertia . . . we do not 
Und in them apy^.cpntitidietiön. . . . But if we observe them in movement, 
cliange, interaction . . . we get at once into contradictions. Movement itself 
is a contradiction. Even a simple meehauical cluinge of place can be acliieved 
only so that the body does and does not find itself simultaneously in the same 
place. The unceasing emergence and simultaneous resolution of this contra- 
diction constitutes precisely movement. [Engels, ÄntiDüring, Warsaw, 1949, 
"Wiedza i Ksiazka," pp. 118-119.] 

Tuns movement — especially mechanical movement — is an objective 
contradiction. . . . Engels took over the Interpretation of move- 
ment as an objective contradiction f rom Hegel : 

The external sensory movement is the immediate being (of contradiction). 
A thing does not move in such a way that it is here in this "now" and ia 
another "now "'there, but that it is and is not in this "here" simultaneously. 
One must agree with the amcient dialecticians that the contradictions dis- 
covered by them in motion really exist. It does not follow, however, that 
movement does not exist but that it is — on the contrary — an existing contra- 
diction. [Hegel; "Logic," p. 521.] 

Hegel refers to the ancient dialecticians in whose opinions the 
roolf of this question is to be sought, especially the famous 
antinomies of Zeno of Elea. According to Eleatic opinion, being 
is immutable and motion merely an Illusion of imperfect human 
knowledge. The influences of this opinion is to be found in 
Plato and also in Aristotle. It all resulted in attempts to prove the 
impossibility of motion. The famous antinomies of Zeno are such 
an attempt. What interests us most here is the so called "paradox 
of the arrow. " 

According to Zeno of Elea an arrow released from a bow finds 
itself in every time-segment in a different place, no matter how 
small the periods of time we choose. It is in every moment in 
some part of space. This "being" of the arrow is, however, 
equated by Zeno with its resting in that part of space. He, 
concludes that if the arrow "rests" in every moment, its motion 
is impossible, an Illusion. 

This antinomy may be handled in various ways. It has un- 
clarified meanings, such as those of the concept of a segment of 
time, of the spatial point, of continuity and discontinuity of time 
and space. But let us consider here one aspect that had con- 
^iderable historical influence, namely, the meaning of the terms 
^'is" and "finds itself." 

(K. Ajdukiewicz solved the question raised here by a different 
mode of reasoning in bis article "Change and Contradiction" 
(Mysl Wspolczesna) , 1948, No. 8. I agree fully with the principle, 
of his argumentation. Compare also bis reference on the position 
of Bergson and Reinach.) 

Zeno says that an arrow "is, finds itself" in no matter how 
small a part of time in some place, meaning really by "is" and 
"finds itself": "rests." But this is not correct, and hence the 
basic error of the pflradox of Zeno. 

The meaning of the word "is" is equivocal. ... It denotes 
sometimes existence, sometimes class membership, sometimes. 
equality, and sometimes "finds itself," etc. Caution is therefore 
indicated in the analysis of this word because of possible con- 
fusions. To Zeno the sentcnce "a body is in a given point of 
space" means "finds itself" there, and both expressions are taken 
to me&n "rests" there. When investigating the possibility of 
movement Zeno already pre.sumes that a body cannot "be" or 
"find itself" there otherwise than by resting there. To him the 
motion of the arrow is an unbroken succession of states of rest 
in ever new parts of space. He remarks quite correctly that an 
unbroken succession of states of rest contradicts the concept of 
motion. The basic error consists in the attempt to "reduce" 
motion to a succession of states of rest. Movement cannot be 
explained by rest nor reduced to it. This is comprehensible, 
especially from the viewpoint of dialectics, which maintains that 
the concept of matter is indissolubly linked with that of motion ; 
that matter is in continuous, unbroken movement, and that rest is 
only a moment within movement, its product, and always has a 
relative character. When we speak about a body as "resting" 
we have in mind the lack of some form of movement, not absolute 
rest. The body is at rest in relation to some other body if both 
of them move with the same speed and acceleration in regard to 
all other bodies. (This formulation is due to Helena Eilstein.) 
Rest may be conceived as a special, limiting case of motion with 
regard to another body (a "movement" with zero speed) ; but 
movement cannot be explained as a special case of rest as Zeno 
wanted. Motion is a primitive concept, not reducible to othera 
and especially not to rest. To Zeno, however, rest was the 
primitive concept out of which he would attempt to deduce 
motion. No wonder that having chosen this as a starting point 
Zeno had to conclude with a denial of motion. In our context 
the word "is" or "finds itself" may mean either "it rests" or 
"it passes." A body observed in some system may be there in 
the sense that it rests there, but also in the sense that it passes 
that place in this system. But passing is not rest and movement 
cannot be decomposed into static states. ... A moving body 
passes through points in space. It "is" or "finds itself" there 
only in this sense. But if we should say now that a moving body 
is and is not in a certain point in space, meaning thereby that it 
passes and does not pass through that point of space, this would 
be contradictory but evidently also false. The moving body doea 
pass through points in space. 

On the face of it, it would seem that the Eleatic error was a 
semantic one, a confusion of the meanings of the word "is"; but 
this would be a purely formal Statement because their error was 
linked with their metaphysical Standpoint (in the Marxist sense 
of that word) which causes their use of coagulated absolute con- 
cepts. Their .starting point was rest and the attempt to con.strue 
motion out of rest was bound to fail and to lead to a denial of 

It should be forcefully stressed that the Eleatic error was 
historically motivated. Without awareness of the historical basis 
of human knowledge and the dialectical character of its develop- 
ment we deprive ourselves of the ability to understand the real, 
essential problems conccaled in the error of the Eleatics. Because 

i. PIIILOS.— U1Q9 

(GlaUex ja 

there were real problems of dialectical contradiction there, in the 
form of the question of continuity and discontinuity of time and 
Space, in the question of the enumerable infinite series that eveu 
in modern times plagued Hubert, etc. The errors of the Eleatics 
were those of creative seareh, a result of real problems but at the 
same time the expression of the limited possibilities of their 
Solution at this stage of development of science. 

It is interesting to study the genesis of the Eleatic errors and 
to analyze how those errors gravely influenced human thought 
and impressed themselves on the standpoint even of the opponents 
of metaphysics. False conclusions issued from false premisses 
>vhich then offered the alternative : either to aecept logical contra- 
diction or to deny objectivity of motion. This was the standpoint 
of Hegel as quoted above. The Eleatics rejected the contra- 
diction and denied consistently the objectivity of motion, while 
Hegel accepted objectivity of motion and consistently accepted 
logical contradictions in the sentences descriptive of motion. Two 
different Solutions, ba.sed, however, on the same metaphysical 
Standpoint — flowing out of the same erroneous premisses, the 
pome erroneous attempt to construe motion out of rest. 

There is no doubt that Hegel 's Interpretation of movement 
influenced Marx and Engels and through them Lenin. Marx and 
Engels were all the more receptive to the reasoning of Hegel as 
there were additional Stimuli due to the State of mathematics of 
that time which was very well known especially to Marx. 

In the mathematical analysis of that time the concept of 
infinitely small magnitudes derived from Newton and Leibniz 
played a basic part. Contradictory properties were attributed to 
these magnitudes, namely, a quantity equal to zero and at the 
same time different from zero. It is clear that such a concept 
of infinitely small quantities reinforced the Eleatic suggestions. 
This was the general point of view commonly held by the mathe- 
maticians of that time and we cannot blame the classics for this 
reason. It is true that Augustin Cauchy and Bolzano had already 
achieved a revolution in the concept of the infinitesimal calculus 
at that time, but their conceptions took effect only in the second 
half of the 19th Century. Contemporary mathematical analysis 
rejects the traditional concept of infinitely small quantities and 
when using this term has in mind a series or a function approach- 
ing zero. Nothing is really left of the old contradictory concept 
of infinitely small numbers. 

It follows that we must talk about movement and rest in a 
logically non-contradictory way. This by no means changes the 
essential theses of dialectics. Its essence, its core, is the principle 
of unity and struggle of contraries, not the negation of the 
(logical) principle of contradiction. Lenin wrote: "We can define 
dialectics succinctly as the doctrine of the unity of contraries. 
Thus we can grasp the core of dialectics." Movement does not 
undermine the logical principle of contradiction but is the unity 
of contraries that we discover in investigating its concrete forms. 
The source of all movement and change is the struggle of internal 
contraries proper to every thing and every phenomenon. In thia 
sense any thing and any phenomenon is contradictory as contain- 
ing internal contraries. This is the essence of dialectics which is 
not impaired by the preservation of the principle of logical non- 
contradiction. More than that: only in observing this principle 
is it possible to talk intelligently about dialectics and its principles ; 
talk about the dialectic contradiction (i.e., of the unity and 
struggle of contraries) in a logically non-contradictory way. 
Otherwise all judgments would be equally valid and all principles 
and laws would lose all sense and meaning. 

These considerations regarding mechanical movement and its 
relationship to the logical principle of contradiction apply fully 
to any form of change . . . which is a continuous decay and 
birth, a unity of past and future, a unity of opposites. But an 
adequate deäteription of change *aust not impair the validity of the 
logical principle of contradiction. . . . 

Dynamism is not reducible to a static State, movement is not 
reducibile to rest. When we analyze more closely the instances 
that allegedly prove the contradictory character of change, if there 
is seemingly a conflict with the logical principle of contradiction, 
it is reducible to such errors as the attempt to explain dynamism 
by a static state, a confusion of the determinations of the subject 
in question, of dealing with the definitions characterizing it in 
different periods of time as definitions characterizing it in one 
and the same period (for instance, progressiveness and backward- 
ness of some Institution in different historical periods, etc.). 

In showing that reality is changeable we do not impair the 
logical principle of contradiction nor the essence of dialectics. On 
the contrary, we stress thereby that change is a unity and conflict 
of contraries. But only in respecting the logical principle of 
contradiction can we understand the dialectical concept of change 
and development. . . . 

Adam Schatf 
DiRECTOR, Institute or Philosopht and Socioloot 





J. PHILOS.— 11109. 

Galley 2Q 


•Offprint from th^ Report is of the Polish Aradeuiv of Sciences, Vol. 
XLVI (1945), N«. 1-5, pp- 28^ 0^ Translatcd from Polish by the special 
editor. . 

1. Classifications of scte nces are of- varioas kinds : 

A. Some of them hav«e exclusively theoretical aims and appli- 
cations; others have also practical ones, since it is on their basis 
that science is organized, for instanee, in the faculties of higher 
schools, or divisions of library cataloorues of libraries are made. 
Only classifications that becam e practically usef ul were introduced 
into life and have achieved popiilarity. This was, for example, 
the case with the medieval diviräon of sciences into "serniocinales". 
and "reales," which becanie the basis of the division of schools 
into "trivium" and "quadrivnim"; the same was true of the 
Classification of d'Alember\\ which formed the theoretical basis 
Qf the great Encyclopedia. 

B. Some classifications introduced only new groupings of 
sciences, while others introduced only a new principle of groupings 
already known. Windelband and Rickert, in contrasting nomo- 
thetical and idiographical sciences, gave a new characterization 
of two groups of sciences, but these groups were already estab- 
lished before them. 

C. Classifications of scienoes differ also in that some conceive 
the sciences in a hroader, others in a narrower sense. Some, for, 
instanee, introduce into tTie sciences, technical disciplines which 
others do not consider as sciences at all. And some of them also 
include philosophy, which others do not count among the sciences. 
The classifications current in antiquity were even mainly classifi- 
cations of philosophy proper, and only additionally and in a 
secondary way classifications of special sciences. The modern 
classifications dealt in the fivst place with special sciences, and 
the classifications of d'Alembert and of Comte did not consider 
philosophy. This was done in connection with the change of- 
the concept of science: if, as was the case in antiquity, only the 
knowledge of unehanging Being — rov 6.ei, ovros eiriffTrtßV — is to be 
considered as science, then this science will be first of all 
philosophy; if, however, as happens mostly in modern times, only 
a methodically grounded and insofar as possible an assured 
knowledge is considered as a science, then philosophy may find 
itself out of bounds. 

D. Some methodologists classify sciences that really exist at 
a given moment — that is, more or less accidental creations of 
historical development. Others distinguish also such sciences as 
would exist if they were to attain the limit of their development. 
They classify not rt'al sciences but idealized ones. And this is the 
work not only of speculative thinkers such as Trentowski or 
Wronski, but also of positivists such as Bain. 

E. But it should be stressed that two entirely diflferent things 
are done under the heading of a "Classification of sciences": first 
there is the division of sciences into groups of similar sciences; 
second there is their ordering, their arrangement according to a 
defined principle, the introduction of a rational order among them. 
When Comte divided the sciences into abstract and concrete ones, 
he fulfilled the first task, but he accomplished the second one 
when he ordered them according to the principle of diminishing 
generality from mathematics through astronomy, physics, chem- 
istry, biology to sociology. There were, however, many classifi- 
«ations that accomplished only one of these tasks. The Classifi- 
cation of Bacon merely grouped the sciences, while that of 
d'Alembert only ordered them— namely, genetically; he tried to, 
arrange them in the order in which they arose in the human mind. 

2. For a long time the implicit premiss of the classifications 
was the assumption that all sciences have the same nature. It was 
thought that knowledge— if it be scientific— has fixed properties 
which are always the same; it is always of the sort found in the 
natural sciences; it is based on experience and aims at the 
establishment of general laws; if it lacks these properties, it is 
no science. 

But if sciences do not diflfer as to their nature, they may 
differ only as to their subject matter. And if they were to be 
differentiated, classified, grouped, ordered, it would be only 
according to their subject. It is on the basis of this principle 
that antiquity distinguished theoretical from practical sciences 
and the Middle Ages formal from material (real) ones. It is on 
this principle that Bacon and d'Alembert build their classifications. 
But this conviction about the common character of all sciences 
was questioned at the end of the 19th Century. In the first place 
not all sciences are empirical: there are also some based not on 
experience but on axioms, and they do not inquire into real objects 
but into relationships between assertions or concepts. Such 
sciences are logic and mathematics. They are not empirical but 
axiomatic sciences, or, to put it differently, not material (real) 
but formal sciences. 

Second, not all material sciences have the same character. 
There is a elear difference between natural and humanistic sciences. 
The humanistic ones differ from the natural ones not only by 
their subject matter but also by their character. Originally this 
was not taken to be a basic difference but only a diflferent stage 
of development of science. But at the turn of the 19th and 20th 
centuries such a conception was considered incorrect. The his- 
torical sciences are not imperfect systematical sciences ; they really 
diflfer from them and have a diflferent task. A conviction arose 
that there are— as a matter of principle— two diflferent kinds of 
science: one kind establishes particular facts, the other general 
laws. The diflference between them is not a diflference of subject 
matter because the same subject may be dealt with in both ways. 
The historical sciences (which comprise the majority of the 
humanistic ones) are of the first kind, the systematic sciences 
(which include a greater part of natural sciences) are of the 
second one. 

The division of sciences into sciences about facts and sciences 
about laws was carried through most consistently by Windelband 
and Rickert. They called the sciences stating singular facts 
idiographic ones and those asserting laws nomothetic ones. This 
division was almost universally accepted. It has the merit of 
pointing to the fact that not all sciences — as was formerly assumed 
in general— are nomothetical. Nevertheless the division is de- 
fective. It errs in two ways. In the first place, it assumes the 
existence of idiographic sciences which in fact do not exist. In 
the second place, it does not consider sciences which without being 
idiographical are not nomothetical either. 

It is true that the establishment of particular facts takes much 
Space in the historical sciences. But this can be said also of 
systematical sciences and in a general way of all material (real) 
sciences, in the humanistic ones as well as in the natural ones. 
This is not a property diflferentiating the two groups. It is the 
starting-point in both groups. But it is not the aim in any of 
them. It is neither the aim uor the end of investigatiou in the 

Jt PHI^OS.— 11109 

Gajley 21 

historieftl, humanistic sciencef*, jjast as it is not in the systematic, 
natural sciences. There is no material suience that( could dispense, 
with the Statement of facts, but there is none eiffher wh;ch wopld 
stpp there. Materials for sciences or parts of seiendes have ii^i 
idiographic character but not whole seienees. Thpre are ut^ 
Qxclusively idiographical sciences. 

3. What character, then, have the sciences that are not nomOf 
thetical? What is the aim of those that de not undertake the. 
establishment of laws ? This question can only be answered in the 
following way: they try to establish types, various gestalten in 
which the phenomena appear in a given field in order to dis- 
tinguish natural groups within these phenomena. Let us call 
those sciences that State laws nomological (this is a better nam© 
fehan "nomothetical" or "law-constituting laws," since this con- 
cept presumes that we are constituting those laws, while it is a 
controversial question whether we posit or merely discover them in 
the phenomena), and the sciences establishing types — typological 
The former establish laws, the latter types. While the former 
investigate what in a given field is common to all phenomena, the, 
latter investigate those various forms (gestalten) in which the, 
phenomena occur in these fields. This is the most essential 
division of sciences which reaches deeper than the division into, 
natural and humanistic or systematieal and historical sciences. 
It is not carried through according to the different subject matter- 
of the sciences but on the basis of their different tasks. 

The historical sciences — for instance, the history of art or 
philosophy — not only State what works of art were created and 
what opinions were held in philosophy in the course of time but 
also what styles were formed in art, what kinds of doctrine, what 
trends existed in philosophy. And we see something similar in 
political or economic history. They, too, not only State particular 
events; they equally establish the general and typical forms that 
political or economic affairs assumed in a given historical period. 
They deal, in other words, with the historical types of politics and 
economy, just as other divisions of history deal with the types- 
of art and philosophy. In all its divisions history not only estab- 
lishes facts and Orders them genetically but also establishes types. 
But not only history does this. It is done also by other non- 
historical sciences. All historical sciences are typological but not 
vice-versa: not all typological ones are historical. Geography is 
also a typological seience. Systematic botany is also typo- 
logical, because it separates, contrasts, systematizes, cla.ssifies the. 
types of plants. In this work it does not stress their origin in 
time, as does history, nor their distribution in space, as does 
geography, but it deals mainly with the manifold types existing 
in the world of plants. 

The typological sciences emphasizing particularly the temporal 
properties of types are usually called historical. Those laying 
.stress on their spatial properties may be called topographical, 
while for those that arrange the types without regard to their 
temporal and spatial characteristics we may reserve the name 
systematic. These are three varieties of typological sciences: 
historical, topographical, and .systematic. But we must not con- 
sider the topographical sciences as a separate group because they 
are far less developed. We might include them for the sake of 
simplification among the historical sciences in enlarging the 
concept of the latter. The historical sciences would then en- 
compass all those disciplines that inquire into the temporal-spatial 
distribution of phenomena. We would then be left with two 
varieties of typological sciences : the historical and the systematieal 

As a result of these considerations we get the following simplo 
table of sciences: 

y formal 
Sciences <^ y Nomological 

^ material ( real ) < / Historical 



The main new feature of this table is constituted by the typological 
sciences. The concept of type on which they are based is neither 
a simple nor a very clear concept : as to this we should have no 
illusions. In natural sciences a type means more or less the same 
as "a Stahle species"; in the humanistic ones it means more or 
less the same as ' ' norm " or an average of some field of phenomena. 
But the concept of "law" on which the nomological sciences are 
based and also the concept of "fact" on which the idiographical 
sciences were supposed to be based are not very simple or clear 
either : this was shown conclusively by the methodology of the 
last decades. 

It is in accordance with the spirit of cur time to assign to 
the typological sciences an essential position among the sciences: 
the concept of type is placed in the foreground in various fields 
and from different sides. It is natural that it was taken into 
consideration also in the cla.ssification of sciences. 

4. The division of sciences suggested here does not exclude the 
possibility of some other divisions, especially the division of 
sciences into natural and humanistic ones. This is a division 
completely different from that into nomological and typological 
ones. One could have doubts as to whether there are humanistic 
sciences, other than typoglogical ones, but there are certainly 
natural sciences that are not nomological. The typological sciences 
are, namely, the following: historical geology (a typological seience 
of the historical variety) and the systematic botany of plants (of 
the systematic variety). Similarly all varieties of typological 
sciences are to be found among the humanistic ones: the history 
of art belongs to the historical variety while comparative linguisticsi 
belongs to the systematic one. 

That there are two kinds of sciences, nomological and typo- 
logical. seems to be a non-controversial matter. But the scope of 
each might be a moot point, especially in humanistic sciences. 
One could hold not only that the typological sciences exist within 
the humanistic field but that the latter contains no other sciences, 
since the humanistic sciences do not wish to be purely idiographical 
and cannot be nomological. 

A case in point in this respect seems to be, first of all, 
psychology. There are, it is true, general psychological laws, 
although not many. But we should keep in mind that the 
humanistic sciences are not sciences about psychic phenomena as 
against the natural sciences which deal with physical phenomena. 
The history of art, ethnography, linguistics, and other typically 
humanistic sciences do not deal with psychical but with psycho- 
physical phenomena. The humanistic seienees are those that 
inquire into the crcations of man — as against the natural sciences 
that in((uire into creations of nature; this is the real difference 
bctweeu them. 

J. PHILOS.— 11109 

Galley 22 

But if we understand them in that way, th^n psychology — at 
least in a ©ertain part of it— is not a humanistic but a natural 
science because it deals not with creations of man but with man 
himself, who is a creation of nature. It is just this part of 
psychology that forms general laws. This part does not transcend 
in general the elements of psychical life. But if it proceeds from 
the elements to the complex forms (of psychical life), then it 
must diflferentiate between various types of experiences, various 
types of men, various charactors, temperaments. Then it becomes 
a typological seience. For some time this typolojjical part of it has 
been given a separate name, namely, "characterology." 

Sociology is also a typological seience. Although it establishes 
eonnections within social phenomena and calls them laws, such 
connections exist only within the limit of some social type, while 
within another type there are others. There is something similar 
in economics and equally in linguistics. 

It is a marked tendency of contemporary humanistic sciences 
to transcend history, for instance, to create a theory of art in 
addition to a history of art, a theory of literature along with a 
history of literature. But a theory of art or a theory of literature 
is also a typological seience — not a historical one, it is true, but 
a systematic one; it has no similarity with nomological sciences. 

5. If we adopt the division of sciences into nomological and 
typological ones, there is no difficulty in deciding to which of the 
two groups a given seience belongs. Difficulties may appear in 
philosophy, but not in the special sciences that emerged from it, 
such as logic, psychology, or history of philosophy. For it is 
clear that logic is a formal seience (an axiomatic one), psy- 
chology — at least in its elementary part — a nomological one, while 
characterology is typological (in its systematic variety) ; history 
of philosophy is also typological (but in its historical variety). 
The difficulties occur only in the Classification of philosophy 
"itself," this central discipline that is left after the elimination 
of the "philosophical sciences" — i.e., concerning the Classification 
of ppistemology or metaphysics. It is not convincing to put them 
into the realm of the nomological nor into that of the typological 
sciences, since they establish neither laws nor, for that matter, 

The Solution may lie in the assumption that philosophy forms 
an additional, third group of sciences which establishes neither 
laws nor facts but some general hypotheses as to the nature of 
things or of Cognition. But there might be another Solution: 
philosophy cannot be placed in any group of sciences because — it 
is no seience at all. It is something eise or something more than 
a seience. As Schlick puts it: even if we should accept the 
conception that philosophy is the queen of sciences, it was nowhere 
said that the queen of sciences must also be a seience. And there 
are a sufficient number of cla.ssifications of sciences which share 
this Standpoint. Philosophy may be conceived— as with Cournot— 
not as a separate seience but as a component part of all .sciences. 
Or — as with the contemporary positivists — as an Operation 
preparatory to the sciences, as an art creating the necessary basic 
coneepts and methodological directives for the sciences. Or if 
philosophy is conceived rather as metaphysics it may be placed 
closer to religion than to seience. 

The hi.story of the Classification of sciences shows a certain 
variety— but not a very considerable one, as though the number 
of possibilities were rather limited, so that similar ideas reappear 
all the time. But a Classification such as is proposed here has, 
it seems, not been thus far applied. The groups of sciences which 
it distinguishes have been distinguished formerly but according 
to a different principle. 

Wladyslaw Tatabkiewicz' 
University of Warsaw 












^. PHILOS.— 11109 

Galley 23 


* Abridged e.xcerpt froni tlie cliapter " Pliilosopliy of the Twontieth 
Century," pages 260-269 of tlie autliorV book, " Tlie History of Pliilosopiiy," 
Vol. III, which appeared in 1958. The translation is by the special editor 
of this issue. 

. . . -'Contemporary" philosophy seems to be a concept more 
or less identical with the philosophy of the "20th Century." The 
new period began vhen it abandoned what was essential of the 
preceding period: positivism, generally speaking: minimalism, a 
philosophy foregoing greater arabitions in order not to run the 
risk of errors. The first Symptoms of retreat were already visible 
around 1890. The works of Bergson and James were already 
appearing, and the names of Bradley, Brentano, Poinearö, and 
Dilthey had come to the fore. The positivistic, scientistic, natural- 
istic, deterministic conception of the world and of man, patterned 
after the natural sciences, began to lose its position. . . . 

. . . Many doctrines developing in the 2üth Century aimed at 
absolute truth, at assertions not dependent on the place, time, and 
conditions under which they arose : this was the case with 
Bergsonism, phenomenology, Anglo-Saxon realism. However — 
other doctrines aimed at being only the expression of their time, 
of its needs and strivings. They did not believe in the possibility 
or, indeed, in the value of absolute doctrines. "The era of pure 
reason," they wrote, "of a science free from all premisses, of all 
valuation is over. ..." 

No period of philosophy has been wholly uniform ; in every 
one of thera there have been tendencies apart, Opposition, remnants 
of former epoehs, or anticipations of coming ones. This was the 
case also at the end of the 19th Century, although at that time 
minimalism prevailed. But any period must seem monolithic when 
compared with the 20th Century. 

Not only many doctrines but diametrically opposed doctrines 
came to the fore. About any previous phase of philosophy . . . 
it is possible to State at least whether maximalist or minimalist 
tendencies, or, to put it differently, whether ambition or resigna- 
tion prevailed in it. But this became impossible when philosophy 
extended from theo.sophy to mathematical logic; and even if we 
should consider neither of these as "philosophy," the philosophy 
of the 20th Century still extended from the idealistic metaphysics 
of the Italians or the Anglo-Saxons to the super-positivism of the 
Viennese. Prior to this generation the positivists integrated 
philosophy. Their conceptions gave a common tone to the 
philosophy of their time. In the 20th Century such unifying 
tendencies were laeking. The positivism of the 19th centurj' — as 
was noticed — acted like frost : it gave a stable form to the ideas of 
this epoch, but when it disappeared those ideas began to 
dissolve. . . . 

. . . This epoch lost the feeling . . . that it was philosophically 
mature, that its ideas were definitive, a final expression of human 
thought . . . it had less self-assurance . . . and the conviction 
. . . that even the foundations of philosophy were not finished 
as yet. 

The philosophy of the 20th Century was first of all analytical. 
. . . But James, Rickert, Husserl began with analyses and ended 
with — most risky — constructions. . . . Whitehead said : " . . . The 
new world needs above all a philosophical cosmology. Other 
speculations will be no Substitute." 

. . . Pluralistic doctrines had most success, being conciliatory 
of divergences. . . . But while methodologists had previously 
been intont on what unites the sciences, they now stressed the 
things that divided them. They scrupulously differentiated formal 
from real (material) sciences, or aprioristic from empirical ones, 
humanistic from natural ones, historic from systematic ones, 
idiographic from nomothctic ones. . . . But this pluralism . . . 
was not general. Other philosophical circles came forward 
precisely with the slogans of "unitj' of science." 

. . . Bergsonism and phenomenology aimed at pure theory, 
considering as subjective and relative anything that was con- 
ditioned by practice, by life. . . . But pragmatism and prac- 
ticism denied even the possibility of pure theory, because vital 
and practical needs were supposed to be at the foundations of 
any theory. . . . 

Some upheld scientific liberalism . . . but other movements, 
such as the new positivism, intensified even the exclusive scientisra 
of the former epoch and acknowledged only physics as genuine 
Cognition. Some avoided valuation in philosophy in the old way, 
regarding it only as a subjective human reaction . . . but phe- 
nomenology and English realism held that there were objective 
values and some — like humanism and pragmatism — thought that 
we know them even better than the properties of things and that 
philosophy should deal with them above anything eise. 

Some renewed intuitionism and apriorism. But radical 
empiricism was by no means less typical of this epoch. It saw in 
experience the only source of knowledge, like the most radical 
empiricists of former centuries. 

Some held with Locke or Mill . . . that only our subjective 
experiences can be the object of Cognition, while others — like 
behaviorism — asserted with Comte that precisely those experiences 
cannot be objects of knowledge; only objective facts can. 

. , . While some — like psychoanalysis — introduced unlimited 
determinism even in psychology . . . others found proofs of 
indeterminism even in physics. 

Some saw in ronvrntinnalism the greatest conquest of philos- 
ophy. Like Bergson or Poincare, they discovered a Convention in 
every scientific theory and, like Ajdukiewicz or Alfred Korybski so 
populär in America, even in every act of knowledge, since the 
latter depends on some kind of conventional conceptual apparatus, 
But other tendencies — like phenomenology, intuitionism, idealistic 
and realistic physics — were convinced of the accessibility o£ 
absolute truth. 

. . . While some brought about an unexpected rebirth of 
philosophy of religioyi, whose elements were even contained in 
pragmatism, Bergsonism, and phenomenology, others — not only 
materialism but even existentialism — were liiiked with the atheistic 
movement. Some limited themselves consciously to the study of 
phenomena in the conviction that it was not possible to penetrate 
beyond them or that the detaohment of phenomena from tran- 
scendent beings is an error. Others saw the proper domain of 
philosophy only beyond the phenomena . . . similarly in psy- 
chology . . . some remained on the surface . . . while others 
wanted to deal only with "depth psychology." 

Some explained man, bis history and bis eulture, through 
material factors, others mainly through physical ones. Some 
treated human personality naturalistically as a creation of nature, 
others as a self-contained, naturalistically incomprehensible 
being. . . . 

J. PHILOS.— 11109 

Galley 24 

The 19th centurv was convineed with Kant that copnition 
depended ou the mind and those who did not share this con- 
viction Mere an exceptio«. It ^^•as believed that Kant achieved 
a -Copernican revolution." The hintory of philosophy was 
divided into a pre-critical and post-critical period, and it was 
thou^ht that everything in the post-critical period that was no 
eompatible with Kant was m anaehronism. Bu in the 20th 
Century quite a number of views beeame onee more P»*^-«";'^«/- 

This hi-h depree of diflferentiation was not accidentalj 
it was the resuU of social conditions in the first place. ^ . . This 
was the epoch of the preatest stru.^les, of the birth ot the sociahs 
Order A new culture was arisin^^ and at the same time the 
conservative factors did not cease to operate. This was a grea 
source of the variety of opinions. And the conservative circles 
were characterized by individualism. ... . ,- x- 

In the 20th Century some doctrines were irrationalistic, 
others rationalistic, because the latter generalized its experiences 
while the former satisfled its desires. ... 

But this variety . . . showed up only in the socially conser^'a. 
tive lands: in North America and Western Europe. Where the 
social revolution took place, things looked completely ^ifferent; 
philosophy in the Soviet Union achieved a monohthic unity that 
was nowhere to be found up to this time. 

A part of the new trends . . . had, especially at the beginning, 
the character of a reaction and Opposition to those prevalent in 
the past New pluralism was in Opposition to the thesis about 
the uniformity of all phenomena. New dynamism in the theory 
of nature and psychology was a reaction against the mechanism 
of the former epoch. New personalism— a reaction against 
naturalism. New "psychology of the whole" or the Bergsonian 
philosophy of duration-a reaction against the atomistic, non- 
continuous concept of things and events. New theory of liberty- 
a reaction against determinism. Pragmatism-against a pure y 
theoretical position in philosophy. The stress laid by the 2üth 
Century on the instinctive, emotional, subconscious conditiomng 
of the whole psychic life was a reaction against the intellectualism 
of yesterday. Intuitionism— a reaction against positivistic em- 
piricism. The struggle with psychologism in logic was also a 
reaction, and so was the struggle with relativism m eth.cs 
The rehabilitation of common sense was a reaction against 

scientism. ... n vi 

It might have seemed that in the 20th Century all philo- 
sophical movements developed with the exception of positivism- 
since they constituted a reaction precisely against it. This was 
the case in the first two phases of the Century. But after that 
positivism not only returned but assumed its most extreme form. 
When that happened, the third phase of the philosophy of the 
20th Century began. This was around 1930. The new positivism 
began in the Viennese milieu. It was not the only minimalistic 
movement that appeared at that time. The other one was 
"existentialistV philosophy. The organ of the new positivism 
be-an to appear in 1929 and the basic existentialistic book 
appeared in 1927. But the non-minimalistic trends of the former 
years still kept their supporters. . . . 

Wladyslaw Tatarkiewicz 
University of Warsaw 












J. PIIILOS.— 11109 

Gallcy 25 


•Revised text of a lecture adivere.l by the author at tlie Univcrsity of 
California at Berkeley during las visit to the Uuitfd States iu 19G9.— KurroK. 

TUE purpose of my aiialysis is to formulate and comment 
lipon a dcfinition of aetion wliieh woiild serve the purpose 
of praxiolo<ry. Tlie busiuess of praxiolo},'y is to investi<rate the 
essenec of the process of aetion, and to clarify all those eoncepts 
which are indispensable for the description, appraisal, and 
planninji of aetion, and for the jivneral theory of effieient aetion. 
I should like to «rive some idca of the contents of my praxiolo^neal 
book, entitled Treatise on Good Work. In order to do so, l have 
deeided to ehoose an important problem, to eoneentrate on it, and 
thus to show the whole, so to speak, throu-h that seleeted problem. 
The eoncept of aetion will be based on the eoneept of causal 
relationship, defined so as to suit our purpose. The ehanjre which 
consists in the eontaet A of the body x Avith the body C at the 
time /a is the eause of the ehan^e B in the body D at a later time U^, 
and B is the effeet of A, if, and only if, A is a neeessary element 
pf every set of chanj-es at the time ^a, which set is a suffieient con- 
dition of the ehan^e B with respeet to a law of sequence of ehanpes. 
For instance, a t>rahi of pollen falls on the sti<ima of the^ pistil 
and a ripe fruit is formed there after a period of time. We say, 
a-ain, that the eontaet (A) of the pollen {x) with the pistil (C), 
whieh took place at a certain period of time (/a), was the cause 
of the formin<j- (B) of the fruit (D) durin- the time (fu) filled 
by that proeess (and that B was the effeet of A), beeause a certain 
set of events simultaneous with the eontaet of the pollen with the 
pistil, whieh set included that eontaet as its essential element, 
determined the subsequent formation of the fruit in virtue of the 
embryolo<ry of floriferous plants. 

Now such a form of eausal relationship is needed for the 
purpose of definin-r aetion : an elementary proeess of aetion is an 
individual case of brinj-in?' about an effeet by a cause, if the 
eontaet referred to above has the form of just one purposeful 
pressure. The kiekinjr of the ball in a soccer fjame in order to 
impart to it motion in a definite direction is an example of ele- 
mentary aetion. Let us suppose that the ball has been driven 
to the jroal: after the kick, whieh oeeurred in a eombination of 
simultaneous circumstanees (a certain shape of the terrani, a 
certain resistance of the air, a certain position of the goal), the ball 
crossed the «ioal-line as an effeet of that kiek, in virtue of the laws 
of motion of physieal bodies, whieh laws connected that eombina- 
tion of circumstanees, as a sufflcient condition, with the effeet, 
while the kick itself played an essential role in the strueture of 
that sufficient condition, since it was its indispensable element. 
The circumstanees alone, without the kick, would not have driven 
the ball to the troal. The components of such elementary aetion 
must now be examined in detail. This is very important since 
all aetion either is elementary aetion or consists of elementary 


Elementary aetion includes simple pressure, a sinple act of 
pressure. Thus, for instance, riding a bicycle is not an ele- 
mentary aetion but a Compound aetion, since it consists of a num- 
ber of simi)le pressures. The eoneept of simple i)ressure will be 
explained only by means of examples. Let us eonsider a bow shot. 
It takes place when the arrow is discharped, and it befiins with the 
release of the pressure of the band holdinp: the drawn strinjr with 
the fin<.'ers. Freed from that pressure, the strin<r ejeets the arrow 
towards the tarjiet. Of course, before the pressure upon the string 
was released, that strinji had to be drawn, and this was achieved 
by the archer by means of in-essure. The whole process was a 
certain compouiul aetion by the archer, consistin-r, so to say, of 
many acts, and the drawin«; of the strin? was one of the component 
preparatory acts. Nevertheless, the last elementary aetion con- 
sisted in lettin<r the arrow <jiO. We have here an example of ele- 
mentary aetion whieh befrins not with exertin<r pressure but with 
desistinjr from it. In such a case we mi<rht speak of ne<rative 
pressure. Yet the two forms of pressure, the positive and the 
ne«rative, have somethiii«-' in common. A chanjre of pressure oecurs 
in both cases. Such a chan-je need not always be a radical one — 
i.e., one in whieh a pressure whieh did not exist before comes to 
be exerted, or a pressure whieh existed is desisted from. Quite 
often the chanjre consists in increasin? or reduein? pressure, as 
when one increases or reduees pressure upon the brakes in order 
to increase or reduce the speed of a vehicle proinp: down a slope. 
To put it briefly, the initial event of an elementary aetion con- 
sists, strictly speakinjr, not in purposeful pressure, but in a pur- 
poseful Chance in pressure. Our preliminary formidation must 
be corrected in this way if we want to include in one eoneept all 
the cases of elementary aetions. 

Let US now examine th(> ciian<res whieh r(>sult from such ehanpes 
in pressure. To bejrin with, let us give examples of suceessful 
aetions where the purpose has been achieved; the ball has been 
driven to the froal, the bell has runpr, the lif.dit has been switehed 
off, the arrow has hit tlie tar-iet. Does it always happen in the 
case of .suceessful aetions tliat we ehan-re s(micthiu>r if we achieve 
somethinjr, and does such a cluni-jc always constitute that whieh 
we wanted to aehieve? Do not cases of j)reventinf!: a chansre also 
fall into the eate^rory of aetions? If the fjroal-keeper has cau<j;lit 
the ball and preveiited a jroal fnmi beinj.' scored, he has achieved 
that the ball has not crossed the jioal-line. And if we open our 
nmbrella to keep our elothes dry in spite of the raiii, this is also 
an example of achieving not a ehanjre. but a condition in whieh 
somethin«: contimu-s without chaiifre in some respeet: our elothes 
remain dry in spite of the rain. Undoubtedly, if we want to eover 
such cases too by our eoneept of aetion, and at the same time to 
retain our dcfinition of elementary aetion, we must <rencralizc tlie 
eoneept of chanjrc so as to admit that a chaufre oecurs not only 
when somethinji becomes somethin<i: eise, but also when soniething 
remains the same in some respeet throiigh the time intcrval whieh 
we take into eoiisi(1(>ration. In a word, we eonsider the eoneept 
of ehange to inchide also what we mi<rht call a /.cro ehangc, whieh 
is ealled duration without ehange or a relatively perma- 
nent State of a -riven tliinfr. But then one cannot resist the 
question. whctlu'r a zero change may not be the initial event of 
an aetion: does it not happen that we act through a pressure 
whieh continues unchanped for a period of time.' Of course, it 
does happen when, e.jr., we support a fallinjr fcnee or hcld on 
the leash a dog whieh would lik.> to jump forward. A certaui 
dillicuity arises in .such cases, viz.. the dillficulty of determinin? 
what time intcrval of eontinuous pressure is to be eonsidered as a 
sinjrlc act of zero change. a single act of sustained elTort. I -h) not. 
however. inteiid to enhir-e upon this rather speeulative .litlicuity, 
the morc so as a lon-eontinued i)n'ssure usually consists of 
numerous ettorts toliownig oin- «ikmiui m .piiv« .^,t^v,. .►.•>;.•,•• •-•--- 
are separate acts of renewing the W(<akenin<r i>ressure. What is 
interesfiriL'. how.'ver, is a similar probh«m. namely. whether one 
ean act without any pressure at all. that is, neithcr inereasing 
pressure not redueing it, nor leaving it on the same Icvcl (a 
Icvel of a certain non-zero tcnsion). It sccms tiuit a person wlio 

J. PIIILOS.— 11109 

Galloy 25 


• Reviscd tcxt of ;i k-cture dflivoroil Ijy tlic autlior at tlie Uiüvcisity of 
California at Berkeley duriiig liis visit to tlie Uuited States iu 1959.— EuiTOB. 

THE piirposo of my analysis is to formulate and commout 
lipon a (Iffinition of action whieh müuIcI scrvo the purpose 
of praxiolofry. The businoss of praxiolojry is to investi-rate the 
essence of the process of action, and to elarify all those coneepts 
uhieh are indispensable for the deseription, appraisal, and 
plannin<r of action, and for the «jeneral theory of effieient action. 
I should like to «rive some idea of the contents of my praxiolofrical 
book, entitled Treatise on Good Work. In order to do so, 1 have 
deeided to ehoose an iniportant probleni, to eoneentrate on it, and 
thus to shoAV the whole, so to speak, throu<ih that seleeted probleni. 
The concept of aetion will be based on the concept of eausal 
relationship, defined so as to suit our purpose. The chanj!:e whieh 
consists in the eontaet A of the body jr with the body C at the 
time f A is the cause of the chanj;e B in the body D at a later time tu, 
and B is the effect of A, if, and only if, A is a necessary element 
pf every set of ehanges at the time /a, whieh set is a sufflcient con- 
dition of the ehan<re B with respeet to a law of sequence of ehan-res. 
For instance, a fjrain of poUen falls on the sti^ma of the pistil 
and a ripe fruit is formed there after a period of time. We say, 
again, that the eontaet (A) of the pollen (r) with the pistil (C), 
whieh took place at a certain period of time (/a), was the cause 
of the forming (B) of the fruit (D) durinjj;' the time (tu) fiHed 
by that proeess (and that B was the effect of A), because a certain 
set of events simultaneous with the eontaet of the pollen with the 
pistil, whieh set included that eontaet as its essential element, 
determined the subsequent formation of the fruit in virtue of the 
embryolo^^y of floriferous plants. 

Now such a form of eausal relationship is needed for the 
purpose of defininji; action: an elementary process of aetion is an 
individual case of bringinji' about an effect by a cause, if the 
eontaet referred to above has the form of just one purposefui 
pressure. The kiekin«,' of the ball in a soccer pame in order to 
impart to it motion in a definite direetion is an example of ele- 
mentary action. Let us suppose that the ball has been driven 
to the {Toal: after the kick, whieh occurred in a combination of 
simultaneous circumstances (a certain shape of the terrain, a 
certain resistance of the air, a certain position of the fjoal), the ball 
crossed the goal-line as an effect of that kiek, in virtue of the laws 
of motion of physical bodies, whieh laws connected that combina- 
tion of circumstances, as a sufficient condition, with the effect, 
while the kick itself played an essential role in the strueture of 
that sufficient condition, since it was its indispensable element. 
The circumstances alone, without the kick, would not have driven 
the ball to the jroal. The components of such elementary action 
must now be examined in detail. This is very iniportant since 
all action either is elementary action or consists of elementary 

Elementary action includes simple pressure, a sinple aet of 
pressure. Thus, for instance, ridinp: a bicycle is not an ele- 
mentary aetion but a Compound action, since it consists of a num- 
ber of simple pressures. The concept of simple pressure will be 
explained only by means of examples. Let us eonsider a bow shot. 
It takes place wheii the arrow is diseiiar<zcd, and it be^'ins with the 
release of the pressure of the band holdinjj the drawn striii<r with 
the fin<,'ers. Freed from that pressure, the strinp ejects the arrow 
towards the tar<>et. Of course, before the pressure upon the strinpr 
was released, that strin<>- had to be drawn, and this was achieved 
by the areher by means of pressure. The whole process was a 
certain Compound action by the areher, consistinp:, so to say, of 
many acts, and the drawin<r of the strinp: was one of the component 
preparatory aets. Nevertheless, the last elementary action con- 
sisted in lettiii«;' the arrow go. We have here an example of ele- 
mentary action whieh be<rins not with exertin<r pressure but with 
desistin<r from it. In such a case we mifiht speak of nejrative 
pressure. Y(>t tlie two foniis of pressure, the positive and the 
ne^^ative, have somethinjr in common. A change of pressure oceurs 
in both cases. Such a ehanpe need not always be a radical one — 
i.e., one in Avhich a ju-essure whieh did not exist before comes to 
be exerted, or a pressure whieh existed is desisted from. Quite 
offen the chan<,'e consists in increasiiiji or redueinjr pressure, as 
when one increases or reduces pressure upon the brakes in order 
to increase or reduce the speed of a vehicle proinjj down a slope. 
To put it briefly, the initial event of an elementary action con- 
sists. strietly speakiiifr, not in i)urposeful pressure, but in a pur- 
posefui chanpe in pressure. Our preliminary formulation must 
be corrected in this way if we want to include in one concept all 
the cases of elementary actions. 

Let US now examine the ehanjres whieh result from such changes 
in pressure. To befrin with. let us <:ive examples of successful 
actions where the purpose has been aehieved: the ball has been 
driven to the poal. tlie bell has ruiifif, the li-rht has been switehed 
off, the arrow has hit the tar-ret. Does it ahvays happen in the 
case of successful actions that we chanjre somethinjr if we achieve 
somethinpr, and does such a chan<re always constitute that whieh 
we wiinted to achieve? Do not cases of preventiiifr a ehans:e also 
fall iiito the category of actions.' If the |j:oal-keeper has caught 
the ball and prevented a goal from being scored. he has achieved 
that the ball has not erossed the goal-line. And if we open our 
uiiibrella to keep our elothes dry in spite of the rain. this is also 
an example of aehievinjr not a ehaiige. but a condition in whieh 
something continues without ehange in some respeet: our elothes 
remain dry in ,si)ite of the rain. Undoubtedly, if we want to cover 
such cases too by our concept of aetion. and at the same time to 
retain our definition of elementary aetion, we must geiieralize the 
concept of change so as to admit that a ehange oceurs not only 
when something becomes somethinji eise, but also when something 
remains the same in some respeet through the time interval whieh 
we take into consideration. In a word, we eonsider the concept 
of ehange to include also what we might call a zero ehange, whieh 
is otherwise called duration without ehange or a relatively perma- 
nent State of a given thiiig. But theii one caniiot resist the 
question, whether a zero ehange may not be the initial event of 
an action : does it not happen that we aet through a jiressure 
whieli continues unehanged for a period of time.' Of course. it 
does hapiien when. e.g.. we siijiport a falling fenee or hold on 
the leash a dog whieh would likc to .inmp forward. A certain 
difficulty arises in such cases, viz., the diffieulty of determining 
what time interval of eontinuous pressure is to be eonsidered as a 
Single aet of zero ehange. a single aet of sustained effort. I do not, 
however, intend to eiilarge uiioii this rather speeulative ditVieulty, 
the more so as a long-continued pressure usually consists of 
numerous efforts following one another in (luiek sueeession. whieh 
are separate aets of renewing the weakening pressure. Wliat is 
interesting, howev(>r, is a similar probleni. namely, whether one 
can aet without any pressure at all. that is, neither increasing 
proij«iiri> iirtt ri'diicinL' it. nor leavinir it on the same level (a 
level of a certain non-zero tension). It seenis that a person who 

J. PIIILOS.— 11109 

Gallcy 26 

upon bcin-r provoked cU-liberately abstains from reaetintr behaves 
in an active way, and as a result wins approval from the spec- 
taturs, briiijrs diseredit upon the provokcr, and <;ains satisfai-tion 
from bis own prucU'iit aet— an act precisely bceause such behavior 
is an act of prudrnei'. Thi- paradoxical charactcr of such examples 
disappcars when wo realize how mue-h ctfort such restraint eosts. 
No pressure is direeted outward, but one elenehes his fists, or sets 
bis teeth, etc. And evcn if there are no such synii)toms, theu 
there is an internal confliet in our mind ; such an internal conflict 
is internal both in the sense that it takes place within our body, 
and in the sense that apart from physieal pressure there occurs 
some concentration of attention, some straininj; of the ima-rination, 
some concentration of will. Conseciuently we state : there can be 
an elenientary act of which the effect consists in a chan<;e ni an 
extenial object, but of which the initial event is a chan-e in 
internal pressure. And from such a Situation there is but one 
Step to a Situation in which all the processes are internal. For 
there are such cases of elementary acts when the thinkin<r person 
wins his "tÜpij/ca," wins illumination in the form of an internal 
answer to this problem; and he wins it by the üiial act of the 
decisive effort of concentration. So much for the various forms 
of that pressure which is the initial event of an elementary act. 

In an elementary act there is one pressure, but the etfect is 
not one only. On the eontrary, it is the property of action, so 
pre-nant whh dramatic consequences, that even an elementary 
act'involves a countless number of most variegated effects which 
reach extremely far in time and space. 

Whoever refiects on that problem will immediately visualize 
something like a chain whose links one by one transmit the shock, 
or a long train whose cars are successively jerked by the pull of 
the starting engine, or a number of billiard-balls conveying to 
one another the Impulse imparted by the player. It seems natural 
thus to Interpret causality, on which our concept of eifective action 
is based. We must, however, oppose the view that in every 
case of causality, and eonsequently also in the case of etfectiye 
action, there is either a direct pressure exerted on the body in 
which a ehange occurs as an effect of that pressure, or a trans- 
mission of pressure from some other body to which pressure was 
directly applied. To see that such a narrow Interpretation would 
be wrong, it suffices to attend tu those cases in which we protect 
something. If Ave protect a plant against cold wind, against 
parching sun, or against violent rain, we move some sort of a 
screen, but the pressure we exert on it is not eonveyed to the plant. 
The Situation is similar when we prevent certain changes from 
takiiig place in a substance, e.g., when by closing an aperture 
we prevent something from getting out of an enclosed space (e.g., 
animals, people). The same may be said about giving free passage 
to a moving body which would otherwise meet some resistance. 
This happens, e.g., when a switch is moved so as to let an oncoming 
train speed straight ahead, without being deflected to a side track. 
But if neither direct nor indirect pressure on a substance 
proves that a relation of cause and effect occurs as defined above in 
a general way, one might reason as follows: Let us now consider- 
the movement with which a hunter directs his gun toward bis 
victim. In a giveii case he directs it toward bird No. m in a 
flock. P.ut should he direct it toward bird No. n in the same 
flock, he would shoot down precisely that bird. P.ut then, by 
direct ing his gun toward bird No. »», which lie shot down, has 
he not produced the effect of saving bird No. n, the fate of which 
was in his hands, since he was free to direct his gun toward this 
or that bird in tiie giveii flock.' Tlie fact that the pressure exerted 
on the trigger of the gun was transferred, so to say, to bird 
No. m, which was shot dowii. and not on bird No. n, which was 
saved, does not mean in the least that no effect was produced with 
reference to bird No. n, since, as we have seen above, the lack of 
direct or indirect pressure on some substance does not prove the 
lack of relation of cause and effect. In other words, more 
generally: Are we not doers of everything that would happen 
otherwise if Ave should, in a given moment. exert some other 
pressure than that which we actually exerted if we were in a 
Position to exert our pressure in some other way? Does not the, 
hunter in tlie above exaniple, by directing his gun toward bird 
No. in, produce the effect tliat his fellow-hunter nearby remains 
safe and sound, if he was in a position to direct his gun toward 
him.' Consequently, does not that which subseciuently happ<'ned 
to a given substance depeiid on the direction in which the hunter 
pointed his gun .' 

In spite of the faet that the above reasoning has certain 
appearances of correctness, we reject the result of that reasoning 
which would imply that one is the doer of everything which 
would happen if one behaved not as one actually did behave, 
but in a way one was in a position to behave. We do so because of 
the difficulties encountered when we want to give a logieally eorrect 
Interpretation of the eonjunttion "if . . . then ..." understood 
as rejiresenting a count.>rfaetual sentence. Further, the concept 
of being in a position to behave in some other way nnder given, 
and fully defined, circumstances remains a puzzle. We may eor- 
rectly assume that Avhen someone is to make a deeision he may 
behave one way or another, e.g.. he may sign a doeument or refuse 
to sign it, because we never know ttie füll set of circumstances 
which univocally determine the act of agreeing or refusing to sign 
a doeument in c(uestion. Hut if we face the effects oi a certain 
accomplished act we are bound to assume that it was just uni- 
vocally determined by some set of circumstances and that the result 
could not have been any other in view of that set of circumstances. 
P>ut then how are we to Interpret the relationship between 
pressure and effect if we discard the criterion of direct or indirect 
pres,snre on substance, and if the recognition as the effect of 
someone 's pressure of what would liappen if he should exert 
some other pressure when in a position to do so, also falls as a 
criterion.' For the time being I see no other Solution than to 
recognize that the effect is related to tlie causal ehange in pressure 
in such a way that the effect is determined either by direct or 
indirect pressure on the sul)stance on which it is exerted. or by 
other pressures admitted by a given i^erson by changes in bis 
pressure on some proteeting screen. Thus, tlie relation of causing 
something is always characterized by some kind of i)artieipation 
in either transmitting or averting, directly or indirectly, some 
ehange in the |)ressure exerted on substance. 

So much for the elementary act. the elementary eharaeter of 
which. in this interpretatiim. is characterized exelusively and 
sumci.'ntlv l)y the uniqueness of a puri)oseful ehange in pressure. 
In otlier respects an .leiu.'ntary act ean be very much e«mii)lieated. 
In particular. its purp(.sive eharaeter may consist not in a (h-- 
liberate striving toward a very siiiiph' eliau-:c. but in >\u inl.-ntion 
to britur about a very eomiilicated proees.s. with a füll reaiizati.)n 
of its details. Thus. an elementary act can be more or iess jire- 
pared bv previous activity and by its iiit.-IIctual .•(.m|)onrnt in 
the form of reflection. These diffciviircs are disn-arded here in 
the description of what is common to all elementary acts. 

J. PHILOS.— 11109 

Galley 27 

The concept of elempntarj' act is needed for the constrnction 
of othcr coneepts of praxiolo<ry, sinee all activity is eomposed, in 
some way or other, of elcnu-ntary acts which form simiiltaneous 
Avholes, or sets, of aets, aiul consecutive wholes, or series, of acts, 
and wholes eomposed in both ways, or series of sets of acts. 
Further, a ^iven activity may coiisist of aets performed either by 
one ajjent or by many ajrents. In the latter case the final ob- 
jectives of the afjents may be in agreement, which means that we 
have to do with positive Cooperation, or simply Cooperation, or eise 
their objectives may disa<iree, in which case we have to do with 
ncfiative Cooperation, which we call stru«i<,'le, thus widenin^ the 
usual extension of that term. In any case, an activity, whether 
performed by one or many ajicnts, has all its component ele- 
mentary aets connected by postive or negative reference to a given 
final objective. 

My previous discussions concerninp: possible applications of 

the interpi-etation of elementary act and activity, as formulated 

above, induee me to insert a remark here. I have heard protests 

aprainst ahvays recognizinjr that person whose pressure condi- 

tioned a given chanfje in conformity with our definition, as the 

person who caused the change in question. Those who protest 

adduce examples such as the followintr : A drawbridge has been 

built. It was constructed through the efforts of designers, in- 

vesters, workers, etc. When it is ready, an attendant, by turning 

a wheel, draws it up and down. Is that attendant to be reeog- 

nized in each case as the person who causes a passage to be 

formed from one shore to the other .' No, it is rather those who 

have built the bridge who must be recognized as such, since their 

part in makinjr a passajze possible is incomparably greater. Here 

I wish to dispel a misunderstandin-;-. Our Interpretation of the 

relation of cause and effect does not in the least exclude the 

possibility of a plurality of persons. It may be that many agents 

together have caused a certain effect, and, if we are confronted 

Avith a series of acts, then each co-agent is causing the effect in the 

time interval fiUed by the change in his pressure, whereas some 

other person is causing the same eft'ect in another time interval 

filled by the change in his pressure, and in those time intervals 

which correspond to component sets of acts there are many such 

co-agents who are causing a definite effect of the collective act 

under consideration. (Observant readers have eertainly noticed 

that I tacitly assume determinism with respeet to pressures exerted 

on things by persons, and that I treat each such pressure as an 

effect of earlier causes which may be the acts of predecessors.) 

The attendant who draws the bridge causes a passage to be formed 

for those who wait for it, his action referring to the latest time 

interval in which someone has coöperated in any way to form a 

passage. Is he the most important of all the persons eoneerned 

who have contributed to the final effect? Certainly not! That 

one is the more important who is the more difficult to replace. 

I must, however, abstain from eidarging upon this subject, and 

I hope that all will agr(>c to this aphoristic fo'rinulation of the 

criterion of relative importance of persons participating in 

some action. 

Apart from such and similar concepts involved in a technical 
description, the praxiologist needs concepts of evaluation — not 
from the point of view of emotions or sentiments, since these do 
not belong here, but from the point of view of technique of action, 
which ranges from clumsiness to mastery. l'recision, skill, inge- 
nuity, efficieney — these are examples of technical virtues which 
can be contrasted with clumsiness, bungling, producing sub- 
standard goods, wastefulness, etc. 

Furnished with the set of concepts which his discipline re- 
quires, the praxiologist .sets himself to his principal task, namely, 
that of reviewing the great variety of ways in which actions can 
be made more effective ; among them he tries to distinguish above 
all those methods which are applicable to all fields of work, since 
in the case of every kind of work one can strive to use as little of 
physical resoiirces, time, and effort as is needed to reaeh the 
objectives intended. For that purpose the seope of Intervention 
of the agent can be restricted, therapeutics (here broadly under- 
stood as repairing damages and defeets) can be replaced by Pro- 
phylaxis (understood as prevention of damage in a broad sense) ; 
fnrther, one may try to do many things at one stroke, or eise one 
may be satisfied with demonstrating that some step is possible 
so that there is no need for him to take that step actually. 

Tadeusz Kotarrinski 
President of tuf, Poi.isii ArAnr.MY.or SriFNTFs 













/IP 7ZÖ7 

iiiiiMi 1 ■iiiiii ■HMHiiSinfltfWhni 




^^ ^ 



^rn^ ^<Udj uJ* 






NEW YORK 27. N.Y. 



December 21, i960 

Dr, Max Rieser 

519 West 121st Street 

New York 2?, New York 


We have novi reached a decision about your proposed 
translation of this work by Wladyslaw Tatarkiewicz, and 
Mr. Wiggins has asked me to report it to you. 

I am sorry to say that we see no possibility of 
bringing out this work in an American edition. There are, 
unfortunately, a number of reasons why such a venture would 
be impracticable, any one of which would be decisive« First 
of all, Tatarkiewicz and his works are, according to our 
evidence, virtually unknown ainong readers in the United 
States. We have reason to believe that his work is unfamiliar 
even to professional classicists. Indeed, a Polish class- 
icist whom we consulted had not heard of Aesthetics in 
Antiquity , although he was of course familiär with Tatarkiewicz' s 
name. On this basis alone, we can only conclude that a 
translation of the work would not command an audience in 
the United States large enough to justify publication. 
Another problem is that the translation would be a difficult 
and expensive undertaking, even if we could take a more 
encouraging view of its projected audience. We regret to 
have to take such a negative position, but nevertheless 
appreciate your having consulted us. I am returning the 
table of Contents and the reprint herewith. 

Sincerely yours. 

Robert A. Gravallese 
Assistant to the 
Executive Editor 



695 Park Avenue 
New York, N. Y, 10021 

July 25. 1964 

Department of 

Dear Pellow-Philosopher: 

Please accept the copy of the attached paper, which Is a 
reply to Professor George Kline's polemical artlcle, "Soviet 
Philosophers at the Thirteenth International Philosophy Congress/ 
published in THE JOURNAL OP PHILOSOPHY Nov. 7, 1963. By all 
normal Standards this reply should have been published by that 
Journal. However, since it refused to do so, I am circulating 
the paper in this mimeographed form to as many members as possible 
of the Philosophie Community. This puts me to considerable trouble 
and expense; but I think the questions involved are sufficiently 
important to Warrant going out of one»s way to ventilate them. 
The Chief issue is not the content of Soviet philosophy, but the 
attitude wlth which we approach it. 

One of the minor issues, through no desire of mine, has 
become the matter of Standards of editorial policy in the handling 
of polemics , I theref ore add here the correspondence between the 
Managing Editor of THE JOURNAL OP PHILOSOPHY and myself in relation 
to the refusal to publish the paper. It was originally submitted 
Pebruary 5, 1964, and acknowledged by a card Peb. 10. As no 
further word had reached me by April 22, I wrote on that date: 
"Will you please let me know the expectation in regard to the dis- 
cussion paper which I sent to the JOURNAL some time ago?" 

On April 27 the Managing Editor wrote: "Pirst, my 
apologles for holding your paner "On Philosophie Dialogue with 
the Soviets: A Comment" so long. The editors were interested in 
what you had to say, but do not feel they want to get started on 
what might become a long polemical exchange. They have decided, 
theref ore, not to publish it. If you would be interested, instead, 
in sending in some Short note (a page or 2) 'accentuating the 
positive» - polnting out, that is, that there was a meeting in 
Mexico, and again a meeting in Washington at Christmas, and that 
such meetings are small good things in a context of conflict, I 
think they might be glad to^publish such a letter, I have marked 
two hopeful passages in your manuscript." (Underscoring of 
original , ) 

To this I replled (May 4) as follows: "After holding for 
almost three months the reply I submitted to Professor Kline's 
polemic you suggest I might »be interested' in doing something 
quite different - «sending in some Short note (a page or 2)» build- 
ing on the material in two or three selected paragraphs of my 
text. You indicate which portions, thus adapted, the editors 
»might be glad to publish.» They turn out to be those which make 
no reference to Professor Kline»s polemic, which happened to 
attack, directly and Indirectly, my work at the International 
Congress of Philosophy in Mexico, and my general approach to Soviet 

"In explanation you write that »the editors» (one of whom 
is Professor Kline) »do not feel they want to get started on what 
might become a long polemical exchange.» Are not such feelings 
unfortunately somewhat belated, since Kline »s article has already 
been printed by the JOURNAL? Surely it is clear that polemics 
Start not with the reply, but with the attack. Evidently, what 
is now wanted Is that the polemical article printed should not be 
answered, even to the extent of a Single article of no more than 
five and a half pages, by a fellow-specialist directly concerned. 
Please note also that the subject is extremely important: how to 
approach the critique of Soviet philosophy, and the matter of 
dialogue with Soviet philosophers. You are saying in effect: 
Only one viewpoint on that shall be given expression - Professor 
Kline » s . 


. , "Moreover, your letter indlcates that If I were to write 
^ne very brlef »note» suggested In this connection, it would have 
^Ki?^ ^^ o^t: that Conferences between American and Sovlet 
pniiosophers'are small good thlngs in a context of conflict'. 

v.^ u ^^^^ ^^ying to lay down In advance the exact value Judgment 
wnich a specialist must make in regard to his own field, the pre- 
cise tone he must take, in order to have anything at all published? 
pS?TA^^ only wonder how many of the editors of THE JOURNAL OF 
FHILOSOPHY agree that this Is the proper way to handle polemlcs . 
In fact, doesn't this way come very close to what Professor Kline 
Is always accusing the Soviets of?" 

On May 7 the Managing Editar wrote: "Thank you for your 
letter of May 4. I thlnk you are quite mlstaken about the Inten- 
tion of the editors, which was not to allow »expression to only one 
Viewpoint, » but, on the contrary, to allow you to express your 
dissenting viewpoint in the pages of the JOURNAL, but briefly, and 
in such a way as to close the discusslon. Professor Kline, by the 
way, was not involved in this decision. The editors are still pre- 
pared to allow you this opportunlty. I look forward to hearlng 
f rom you . " 

This sounded hopeful to me, so that I replied (May 16) as 
follows: "Thank you for your letter of May 7 whereln you state 
that the editors are prepared to allow me an opportunlty to express 
my dissent from Professor Kline »s views in the pages of the 
JOURNAL. It is understood, of course, that I cannot effectively 
dissent from Kline 's views \vithout ref erring to them, and offering 
specific refutations of untenable polnts. His vie^^^s as printed, 
though they constitute a very Sharp attack, are, I agree, quite 
brlef ly put. I assume I would have equal space, and can assure 
you I have no desire to prolong the exchange beyond that. Please 
confirm, and I shall be glad to proceed on that basis." 

However, my hopes turned out to be unfounded. The reply, 
dated May 20, stated: "Thank you for your letter of May l6. I 
am sorry to sound negative again, but I am afraid that in my last 
letter I did not make the position af the editors quite clear. 
They cannot, of course, allow you equal space; they can allow you 
approximately two Journal pages (or 1,000 words). And they cannot 
promise to publish vjhatever you wrlte, but must continue to 
exercise editorial Judgment - the aim, in this case being (among 
other thlngs) to close the discusslon without a request for 
opportunlty for rebuttal from Professor Kline. V/ith this under- 
standing, I look forv;ard to hearlng from you." 

Thus we had come back to the original Situation: no 
polemics except Kline's. A few days later I received a personal 
letter from a member of the editorial board who said he had not 
Seen the text of my paper. I sent him it, saying (May 26): 1 would 
greatly appreciate it if you would let me know within a week or so 
of your final decision on printing my reply, as considerable time 
has passed, and I want to complete other arrangements if the 
JOURNAL cannot do this, though I oertainly hope it can." To this 
date I have received no further word. 


John Somervllle 

On Philosophie Dialogue with the Soviets: A Comment 

, The recent critical report by Professor George Kline in 
^nis Journal, "Soviet^Philosophers at the Thirteenth International 
riiliosophy Congress,""^ calls for some further comment on the matters 
taken under conslderatlon. Perhaps the report 's method and approach 
caused a neglect of certain encouraging aspects of major importance^ 
tiogether with an exaggerated emphasis on negative aspects taken out 
or context and historical perspective. The account failed to 
notice that the "special closed meeting of Soviet and (North) 
American philosophers" represented an historical precedent, a hope- 
IUI Step forward in the very difficult effort to attain something 
like normal Philosophie dialogue with the Soviets, It v/as the first 
large-scale discussion meeting which ever took place between 
American and Soviet philosophers, involving outstanding figures of 
senior status on both sides, some sixty persons, in free-ranging 
discussion for about two and a half hours, The Sponsoring Organiza- 
tion for this meeting, the American Society for the Philosophical 
Study of Dialectical Materialism, found, after a number of pro- 
cedural delays, that the Russians were eager to participate in such 
discussion, even though the form which seemed most feasible in the 
cireumstances rather placed the bürden upon them. That is, they 
agreed to constitute a panel to answer questions concerning their 
Philosophie positions put by American philosophers. 

This willingness to cooperate, and the serious interest 
shown on both sides, are eertainly encouraging and helpful facts 
in the continuing effort to achieve better Philosophie communication 
Everyone understands that in this case above all others such 
communication Is not merely an aeademic matter, but touches in 
significant ways the over-riding problem of world peace. However, 
this whole aspect of the Mexican meeting, perhaps its most important 
one, is not mentioned in the account. V/hat is presented in detail 
is a number of alleged reasons v;hy one does not succeed in having, 
with Soviet philosophers, frank and non-abusive discussion of con- 
troversial points in furtherance of mutual understanding, in spite 
of the evident faet, attested to and welcomed by almost all (we 
must make an exception for Professor Kline) that that is precisely 
what took place at this meeting. 

The method of the account which yields this stränge result 
is itself Strange. Its point of departure is explained as follows: 
"All of the Soviet delegates professed a eoneern for furthering 
philosophical understanding and the free exchange of ideas. Un- 
fortunately, what they said at the Congress, and what 'they and their 
eolleagues have reeently written, does not entirely Square with 
such aims." "Entirely"? l/ould not this be asking a bit too much at 
the present stage of human history? Let us retain a sense of per- 
spective. Has there yet been any national group which, in so 
eomplex a matter as "the free exchange af ideas" could maintain 
that what it says and does "entirely" Squares with its pi'ofessed 
aims? Having adopted this perfeetionist Standpoint, Professor 
Kline continues: "I shall comment briefly on four countervailing 
tendencies in recent Soviet philosophizing: its dogmatism, its 
abusiveness, the attempt to exclude «allen ideas,» and its refusal 
to discuss central moral issues arising out of current Soviet 
developments . " It is elear fron the start that such an approach, 
applied to any Delegation at any international congress, is 
guaranteed to produce a depressing picture of that Delegation. 
Among every national group, and in every ccuntry from which they 
come, one may find more than enough of such tendencies to fill a 
volume, let alone a report. One is not saying faults of this kind 
should not be dealt with. The point is, that to be dealt with 
realistically, they must be considered in comparative terms rather 
than, as the report does, in Isolation. That is, in the group unde: 
examination, virtues should also be sought, and weighed against 
vices. The Situation in that group should be compared to other 
groups . The Situation as it is now should be compared to what it 
was, in order to see v;hich way it is moving. But these things are 
not done. One chooses to dwell only on sins, and naturally one 
emerges with a sinful picture. One chooses to dwell on the sins 
of A only, and naturally A emerges as the sole sinner. 

Not only does the account thus fall to present any over-all 
picture of the Soviet philosophers' Performance at the Congress, 

1. Vol. IX, No. 3., November 7, 1963. 


slnce it Is restrlcted in advance to discovering whatever could 
De found within the area of the four specific types of fault 
mentloned; the impression of logical eccentricity in this 
approach is increased when it turns out that some of the gravest 
accusations concern matters which are not even alleged to have 
taken place at the Congress. In other words, to Judge the 
Soviets at the Congress, let us look only at their faults; but in 
that severe scrutiny^ let us not confine ourselves to the Con- 
gress! From what point of view would this aoproach be defensible'S 
To what extent is it itself in line with "a concern for further- 
ing philosophical understanding"? Basically. it is a fault-find- 
ing method, 

After quoting at length an "abusive" passage from a Soviet 
paper, v/hich Professor Kline himself indicates he does not take 
too seriously (l may add in passing that I heard, even in plenary 
Session, quite as abusive remarks directed against the Soviet 
philosophers, one impassioned anti- Communis t orator declaiming 
that they had no right to be present at all) he comes to his main 
Charge on this head. "More serious," he writes, "is the abusive 
treatment to which V/estern philosophical critics of Marxism- 
Leninism have been increasingly subjected." It is not made clear 
what tlme scale, if any, the word "increasingly" is here related 
to. My own direct observations of the Soviet scene began in 
1935; and I cannot but bear witness that, over the yearg, and 
especially since the death of Stalin, the amount of abusive 
polemics has not increased, but markedly decreased. To cite only 
one example representative of a trend which has been steadily 
growing in recent years, "Pilosofskie voprosy sovremennoi formal 

noi logiki"! (Philosophical Problems of Contemporary Formal 
lo^lc), a collection of papers edited by Tavanets, cites, quotes 
and comments upon the whole ränge of contemporary V/estern 
literature in its field, including the works of some rather 
caustic and outspoken anti-Soviet figures, without leaving the 
plane of discussion of logical theory. To find any political 
polemics whatever, abusive or otherwise, or any political praise 
of their own regime or leaders in this volume of 362 pages would 
be like finding a needle in a haystack. A book of this character 
would have been quite impossible ten or fifteen years ago. 

To Support its point about "abusive treatment" the report 
actually dwells mainly on matters which had no connection with 
the Congress, Chief ly the polemics between Eugene Kamenka (of 
Canberra) and A. F. Okulov (of Moscow) which arose out of Kamenka»r 
article, Philosophy in the Soviet Union," published in 
Philosophy (London) of January, 1963. Here again it must be said 
the method used appears very odd, from a logical Standpoint. 
What the report quotes from Kamenka is a substantial passage 
which,- while polemical, could fairly be called non-abusive. It 
then quotes the following expressions used by Okulov in the 
course of his reply to Kamenka in an article in Voprosy filosofii 
(Moscow) of July, 1963: "troubadour of anti-Communism, '' "malacious 
slanders, ' motivated by "animal hatred, " "cheap scribbling, " 

sickening concoction.^' Clearly, we have here examples of abusive 
epithets. As the report quotes nothing further from either party, 
it would seem that Kamenka was not abusive, but Okulov was. 
However, upon Inspecting the C'=ixt of Kamenka 's paper, one finds 
the following characterlzations directed by him against Soviet 
philosophy: "unprixicipled disr.ortion, " "does deserve this con- 
tempt, " "unprincipled distortlon and abuse," work in logic 
"philosophically completely parasitic," "contemptible conven- 
tionalism, " "philosophic farrago, " "obscurantlst weapon for 
mystification, an excuse for deliberately obscuring problems," 
Clearly, we have here also examples of abusive epithets. The füll 

1. Moscow. Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR (Institut Filosofii). 
1962. See the translatlon Journal, Soviet Studies in Philosophy, 
N.Y. International Arts and Sciences Press, Vol. IlTl^os 1 and 2 
for the major portion of its text in English. ' 



truth, then, is that there was abusive treatment on both sldes; 
and in this instance it must also be acknov/ledged that It was 
Kamenka, not Okulov, who started lt. 

Professor Kline also found some fault wlth the Russlan- 
mto-Engllsh part of the Impromptu oral translatlon at the special 
Conference meeting. He writes that it "tended to omit or tone 
aown the more dogmatic remarks of the Soviet philosophers, as 
well as those which betrayed the greatest ignorance of con- 
temporary American philosophy." While this extreme concern that 
no objectionable remark should be forgotten or lost sight of 
seems to operate only in a certain direction, it is of course 
possible that some details were missed, in relation to remarks 
proceeding from either side. However, it was specifically 
announced from the platform that any matter of translation which 
seemed to anyone to affect in any important respect the substance 
of anything said should be raised in the discussion period 
Irather than as an Interruption of the process of translation) . 
Professor Kline had the floor for some time in the discussion 
period, but did not at that time bring up any translation 
Problems, nor did anyone eise. We can thus conclude that lAThat- 
ever gaps there may have been were not of substantial importance. 

In regard to the four types of fault specified in the 
report, the piain fact is that on both sides lengthy indictments 
could be drawn. However, ralcing over the past in a spirit of 
mutual recrimination is not a way of making things better in the 
future. This being so, where do we go from here? V/hat is our 
interest in the matter as philosophers? I take it that we want, 
first and foremost, mutual Philosophie understanding. I believe, 
on the basis of some thirty years of seeking for it in this area, 
one way and another, that it is facilitated by the following 
four procedures: 1) providing more opportunities for serious dis- 
cussion and debate with Soviet philosophers; 2) approaching Soviet 
philosophy with the aim of finding strong points and common 
ground as well as weak points and differences: 3) dealing with 
shortcomings and weaknesses in the work of Soviet philosophers, 
in such manner and language as will normally permit remaining on 
speaking terms with the philosophers concerned; 4) correcting, 
within our public and official opinion concerning the content of 
Soviet philosophy, widespread misimpressions, exaggerations and 
distortions which adversely affect intercultural relations, and 
make the attainment of international peace more difficult. 

I believe of course that these points should be acted 
on by each side in relation to the other. However it might be 
noted in passing that their value is not limited to dealings with 
the Soviets, or to situations characterized by reciprocity. 
Clearly, they are necessary preconditions to Philosophie under- 
standing of any contemporary school of thought, irrespective of 
the degree to which that school itself happens to act on them. 
In other words, there is no need for anyone to wait, since it is 
readily demonstrable that in any case the more any philosopher 
follows the procedures mentioned, the more he will increase his 
ovm understanding (if he is a teacher, that of others as well); 
and that the more he neglects or obstructs them, the more he will 
decrease or prevent understanding. Perhaps point 4 is in a 
special positicn; but it should be included, since present-day 
global MST, in threatening the continuity of the human race, 
necessarlly threatens also the possibillty of any philosophy 

Hunt er College, City üniversity of New York 



September 25, 1961| 

I^r. Max Hieser 

519 vJest 121 Street 
New York, N. Y. 

Dear Dr. Rieser: 

I am preparing a lecture on the present Status of 
philosophy in eastern Eürope, an^ in thelight of 
your illu^-ainating article, "Philosophy in Poland," 
•^^ The Journal of Philos ophy of March 31, i960 
I wonder if you would send 'iie any new i.iaterials 
thab you have written (or, indeed , other materials) 
or refer me to materials which might be helpful 
in this regard. (i was in V/arsaw only a few days 
this year, and so shall need to Supplement my 
impressions during that period with the impressions 
of others , ) 

Thank you vcry much. 

Sihc/erely youps J {' /' 

Howard L. Parsons 
Professor of Philos ophy 



NEW YORK,N.Y. 10027 

October 12, 1964 



Mr. Max Rieser 

519 West 121st Street 

New York, New York 10027 

Dear Mr. Rieser: 


Albert Hofstadter has suggested that you might be will- 
ing to give me — and ultimately our Publication Coinitiittee — 
some help in connection with this work by Stefan Morawski of 
the University of Warsaw. 

My Situation is briefly as follows. Mr. Fitch of the 
School of Architecture recently returned from Europe füll of 
enthusiasm about Morawski' s book on the basis of what he 
heard about it in Europe. Fitch has talked to Morawski and 
is ready to get us a copy of the Riish edition for our con- 
s iderat ion, as well as to put us in touch with the author and 
his publishers. The decision about Publishing a translation, 
however, would ultimately depend on whether our Publication 
Committee, composed of members of the Faculty, could be con- 
vinced that this was a book of such importance that we were 
justified in undertaking an English-language edition, and on 
whether the staff of the Press could foresee for it either 
adequate sales to return our costs or such usefulness that 
we would be justified in undertaking a loss. 

Both the Publication Cominittee's decision and the staff "s 
would obviously have to rest on the report of a competent 
reader who could offer the necessary comments on the merits 
of the original work and its interest in this country. We 
hope very much that you would feel inclined to be our reader 
for this work, and I should welcome the opportunity to talk 
to you about it at your convenience. 

Mr. Rieser 


October 12, 1964 

In this connection, I think we might well talk about an- 
other matter. Mr. Hof stadter mentions^ as a colleague of 
Morawski^Tatarkiewicz, and adds that Tatarkiewic«' s History 
p f Äncient Aesthetics is a work that the author is anxious 
to have translated and published in this country. I have 
heard something of this work before from the Polish publisher, 
but I never had sufficient information to feel justified in 
doing very much about the matter. If we should be talking 
about Morawski, I should be glad at the Chance to talk to 
you also about Tatarkiewicz. 

Since this is hardly a conventional request for a read- 
ing report on a manuscript, I think it would be most helpful 
if we could talk and see what the next step should be. If 
you are interested in helping us in connection with Morawski' s 
work, could you telephone me so that we might arrange to get 

Sincerely yours. 

Henry^H. Wiggin^J 
Assistant Director 




Columbia Sttitöersütit) iJrrös 

NEW YORK, N. Y 10027 

December 17, 1961|. 




Mr. Max Rieser 

519 West 121st Street 

New York, New York 10027 

Dear Mr. Rieser: 


Mr. Wiggins has asked me to send you this book and a 
list of corrections for tbe text. The material is enclosed. 

Sincerely yours. 

Harry ^egessman 
Executive Editorial 

HS: er 

Deoember 17, 1964 

ProfeöBor Howard L.PÄraou» 
Department of Philosoph^ 
Ooe College 
Oedar Baplda, 

Sear Srofeasor Pareons 

in surop« and poor health,My oorrespondenoe ia therefore in 
dlaerrangement. I wrote an artiole on the prosent Status of Poliah 
phllosophy In 1963 whloh appeared In "The Jotirnal of the Histors 

SÄ taeiHhf art!oU* :"-'°"^- '' ^^'^'^'^^^ P^of ^dam Schaff 

_ « *^ , tv,,^ .- -°^ probablj know the books of the 

D.Reldel Publishing Company ,Dordreoht Holland /Stuttgart Germans 
whloh publiöhea -aovletioa- fublloationa of the' Institute o"°®°* 

Kr?"!'*^«^?^" !J'*"'"u '^f T«'*^**3' ^^ ri'ibourg,awit3erland,Bdited 
by JJI.Boohenskl. Boohenaki ia a Jeauit prieal .He is a Pole and 

oertainly knowa B»8»ian.I do not know theae publioationa .There 

waa among them a YOlume on Czeoh philcBophy whioh muat hav« been ui- 

fli?«^^ ?**S?^^''^"e the author.I hare alao aeen in the alme 
aeries T.J.Blakeley- Soviet Theory of Knowledge 

5^ ^:l* fi'J^ov-'Pwo aoTiet atudiea on Prege.fhia ia tranalated 
rrom ztxe ctu&slaxi« 

4« fk^ d^ 4 ^ w^i. ^n. Inaofar aa I know all Bast liuropean oountrie» 
in the aoviet orbit publlsh Joornala-moatly (laaterlles on philo aopfav. 
These oarrs artioles in ^^eatern langaages.Thus the Rumanian organ o^- 
riea prenoh artioles and ineofar I am not mistaken the Hungarian oprS 
publlahea in Oerraan. The üaat Berlin "Doutaoheb^eitaohrlft für Philo- 
aophie ia written in öerman and maj have material uaefia to ^on 
and jour projeot« 

^inoerely youra. 

Dr« Max Rieaer 

Mr. Henry H.Wiggina 
Aaaiatant Director 
Journallam Building 

uoiumbia Univeraitv 
Hew ifork ,n.y. ioo27 

Dear Mr 


on the book of StefS'ior'awski^entuiad^n* ''*^^^^«<i '«Port 
a Viaion of the future" dealirs witJ^L?!*™^*" tradition and 
last yeara xia rou«hlv flnrfJ;» L t*u ^°^iet aeattietics in th« 

slon Of the^turT-' Jeans JlÄiJ|iS!^'^°5°LP"^°<^- ?he "vi^' 
of young Marx abont a tlme wh^^^?!?!?^*^**'"«^«*«» the viaion 

S?*«5^W* b.v communis t 3 ooi et? Ä^fff^f*^«^« " will be bred 
tradation. The chaptera on n^inL* ^"f Tradition" means "'arxlat 

-arxist aeathettio^i?e%:?urTi:j?,?rth%^Th,^5|3^^^^-^ " 

publisher mentions a'^p^inJfng'of 'soSJ^'S f^^^t^ text of the 
a lively way and deatined fof i \rn , «opiea- la written in 
by no meana exolusiveirfor LLr?-^ r^K intelligent public but 
and knowledgeable und woSd oertff^* ^'if ^°°^ ^^ informative 

iome introduotion to th^T^TT^^i *^? -i-argely unknorm hara Tf 
withthe "oanon" of 3oviet »«^Jh^i?'' dealing in general "ieJi. 

mention explicity woa^fbe JaeJul «r ^^'°^ '^' text JJea Jof ' 
™i?7 abbreviationa. I would recL«n^"^^^ ^^ «° explanation of 
publication.But the report Jve^thf ^"^2^ t ^^'analation and 
in a comprehenaive wav so thf^ fh ^® contenta of the book 
whethere theae cont^nta are i n^p^ '!f^" °*^ J»<ige for Simaelf 

objeotiona are due to the d fZn^ Tt l ^'^^ Presentation. Theae 
Jf S^^if^tio for aoviet aeatJe%ioa^^id"?K?l '%^"^ to'me too 
Of the doctrinal tlea in which thJ y are atJok!^ loosening up 

oover'/'^°>" -^-- t^« -py Of the book itaJlf under separate 

in your letter od 0ctober\?i9ßJ%hf°^^ o£ '■i'atarklewioz mentioned 
treatment. °°^' 12.1964, theae mattere would merit a aepar 


-^•'-f -i.-ar.T7 II. -igp.j_j-^j3 

Joui^naiiöm Bull ding 

Ol UrrJ) ir, 7r;i v'^ r i! l tvJ 

Fabruai\7 11, 1965 

. a 

^^^cx Hr.- ^^Igplug : 

Stefan i^ore-waki : Between tradition and 

.yonn,^ lUari: nT^oixt a futnre "fiono assthoticua- to b- >ed bv "" 

ocpxoa .lo IS therefore deatin^d for a ov 

pu.rLio,l):y no n^anr cniT for cx:r r.r ta.rjie b 
kaowj.i=»deaole aiici vviiüten Ig a iivolv rav . 
Irir^^ilM unkmum in thie 3oa-trv; and woul.i 
.ind muereoaed readurs.I woald reoomrr.end 

oa.ior intoiiigcrat 

lü deaia ^licli mattirra 
tiiero.toi'o üörtai-il:; 
a tr.Mnalauion aad 

^o-^^ir^tlcn de^liug briofl;; ,iUi tii^ 


mfintinn lt. onl;; iTnili »itl^ .A f.^v .ibbrevia 
exploined^Tiie footnotea are useifal. 

öj-ons cic Li(i aiao be 

ux 'oim ^lü'^i»/ i..'.l.L L.Lij;ö Oj. •»OVl \ •■■t<\ m' -! ..- j ■-, ^ a .^ ^ 

,, ,,. ,. ^ ^^^ returniiig th cop.v of tixe booL. -lih tlie 


pe booLft Of Tatarkiev/los inen1.ion^d in voi^r 
Of r;o1;obrr 1-,19G4 -Mad n.v ^ ^ .c o.va1.e ciJ ^ou.«:J on. 



Cedur Rapids, Iowa 

February 1^, 1965 

Dr. Max Rieser 

519 We^t 121 Street 

New York, N.Y, 

Dear Dr, Rieser: 

Thank you for your letter of Decembcr 17, ?:-ivlng information 
about philosophical thought in Eastern Surope. If you 
hqve availpble a reprint of your article that appeared 
in the Journal pf; the tlistory, of Ideas in 1963, I would 
very much appreciate a copy, 

I apprecipte your mention of publications relevant to my 
interests. p's I think I said in my September letter, I 
found your article on Polish philosophy very useful. I 
was pleased with my conversations with Polish nhilosophers 
last June in Poland» 

Sirio^rely yours 



/^Ui ^v-^ 


Howard L. Parsons 
Professor of Philosophy 



NEW YORK.N.Y. 10027 

Harch 2, 1965 



Mr. Max Rieser 

519 West 121st Street 

New York, New York 1002? 

Dear Dr. Rieser: 



Encloaed is our check for flfty dollars, our payment for 
having subraitted to us a reader's report on this book. ön 
behalf of Mr. Wiggins, I want to thank you for your helpful 
report on this work. 

Sinc/rely your 3, 

"^"^ Harry S^essman 
Executive Editorial 


HS: er 


Heport onJiatefan Morawaki : Between Tradition an a Vision 

of the Future" £38 (240) pnges. Warsav; 1964- 
Pubiishera ''ZbIc.zIib. i Wiedza" 

The bool: meni^ioriod above deali witfi the preaoat atate of joviet 
aestfietios (196S)xh3 rnthor toecftes aesthetica at ..arb0W Uaireriit^? 
as a sacüOböor of Prof /"ladTalaw Tetarkiewica^äe beiong;:> to the ^ounger 
generation oi* coiA^r.uniot iiaiversit^? teacher8,i£ an able v^^riter, babicai- 
ly mts hio teaolior a lig^/wOrian of naathetioa, a iiberai i^arxi^t ia 

outiook,esaeü.tibvii^ vcr^? OLltioal of the basio asaumptionü of daet 
aestiiatic theor^^Iu th iutrcdaction he as^erta,hov;ever , his 
fraternal feeliags for hio T?uc}Slan oollaagues and aithough oieax f^nd 
fiindamüntal his oritlcicm Is v^ry mild and reaerved in tone «He n(?vor 
attaoks the Htzssian acßtlio+^lolr:n^.#ii0rav/3ki who studied originali;^ 
j^nglivnh literatare €.ad ^pent porbopiä 2 v©*3rs in i^ngland has an intiniate 
kno.vledge of Kaösian aesthf tioii «Already in 1958 he revie-vöd in the lo^^*^ 
Journal "Przeglad IIu.uani.sticsn3^" th^ bookb of A.I.Bar ov, V.'/aniälov 
and A.Ü.i^/ndtriava all of ^hom appear proninentl^ in l^he book at hnnd. 
He spent throo nonths in T?nc3i8 in the ^am:icr 1963 :>tud3;iug che 
aestlietio lltcrat^.ire ür\^ disouaeing v.ith hi-^?. 3oviot coileegraes. 

Iliö book ia ''a token of friondohip" and oupi.o..od "to la;; the ground- 

work ior a freternaJ dialogae betwcen Joviet and Poi.ish aeitiietic8«V 
Pol iah v^Ä^cT 

But; :ÄfiicxÄJk aeathetica are Teatsrn in outlook and are not uuder)part;; 

diiioipli^ie Äö are the v/rltera on aeothr?tiOo in I?n::>Liia« 

Tho üüOiC coni^titatca an ejiceilent introdaütiou in'uo :>oviQt 

aestiietios for fo/röign r^aders ,it adpptb tho .Veoteru method of 

presonting aestuctic problemo ,not the one curront in Rusaia« ^ 

On the whole Uorawski'o preeentation is objeotive althougii he 

stresaea the pointa which nre an ob.jeot of di'^ca^aion in lioviet 

oirol^s» Ilia book has a '^tpndenoy'' • I.Ioiawakl v/anta to chov/ thqt the 

sesi lugly iraiautabto "oonon" of Soviet aeatlietloa Is disaolvlng under 
tha ,itros3 of nev/ currenfca and freor dicoussion.Thia is snpposed to 
parallel a T;holp gf-lpxy of nsw srtiaUc manifeütations like tfie worlca 
of ie-v-tushinko, Alioicnov, 3olzhpnU,33;n,'/03neoeasKS , the drariiaa of Hozov 
the films üf ;;om:n,Tohu>:hraJ .IJnrkoralci .Kalik eto. It ib doubtfal whetHer 
thiä is "borno out 117 tha oontenta of t.he book, 
It iz aiTricied Into the following ohaptera: 

lutroductiOTj , j, ■ 

1.) On tlie &\ibjoct nnd mthod of aeatketios 
2,b-08l;h!?tlc ineH.tlis (ines-tlona of value ) 
5.) 0p. realia.ii aa an aJtlotio oatesory 
4.)ön th'? ;ioof?ll.ed mc(5R?n st^ie nrd modornistio art 
5.)0n the artiätio genera and apsoiea, 
6.) Ou the sooelled applied nrt 
7. Other ae&thetio oategoriea 

ü.) Reaesroh in th e fialA-Pl-b^fe^O'^y °^ aaathPtio tboaght 
Index of namas 

Lam (3Kf p 

The contrE.1 oh-pVrr 1.: tho ona deaüng vd'-!i realiam (3b pagoii), 
furthermore the on- denllnß rdt^atcry of »8ottietioa{8.)-v;hioh 
18 equ.all7 volmlnour. and 4^ 1 Ib in n .aT^Jcot in .vhioh Soviet thought 
ie more prodnctlve thnn ir.-.h^ory.-^orr^v/aki ..'««to^ in tho pr^feoe th^t 
ih^re 15 moh int^ro.t in «eath.tics in I^na^la UJaj; 5hat thia aubject 
is tf.nght m rll TTiia-i^n^riivorsitlce and tha'. thare aicre than 100 
speoi.liata />n thai r,«^^- in t.he .niv.ruiti.a. J.ok. ou ae.thotica aro 
"Ijeat aei;! ^rB"This it too enth^.^lsttlü bccaa^o the printingi of 
aeathetio booka in «.ze.ia are relatival^- ..uall. (GOOQ-GOOO copiea) 

Chapter 1.- Acoordins to F.Krivit3l.i .Iloraval:! statc?, 
aeath^ttic. is ^n "interm^^dlary betwean philos,oph.7 and thocrie? of art 
whoi^e phil aophioal foundatlon it providea Ju.t i-a Philosoph:; ia tha 
fom:dation of .esthetiÄs. After t.he v;ar Medoahsvin.Bor.y.l'roflmov ar d 
othors eüserted that aesthotica is not onlj a di-.oiplinö dealiag v;ith 
art biit vith the "aosthetitio aaaimilation" t£ e^ci.teaoe.fröaLity ; . 
Aooording to M.Dynnik (1940) aesthetios was tho generai bheori/ of tat 

ötoooräing to G.Puzia aeathe'.ioa is a theory of aesthetio dispositions, 
tni^.te ana beantv in gsnoral.Tt ic an error to oonsider art as tlie maln 
object of aestheticB or as the hirrhest form of aBsimllation of reality. 
The t^xfbook "Osnovy mnrlrsistko-loninakoj eatetiki" (Ifoundotiona of 
llarxiat -Leninist aeathetios) mbliahed i960 by the Institute of Phi- 
losoph? and the Institute of Pino Arta (imder fehe editorahip of 
V.Berf^stnev and G.lIedosh:;vin) hes a steteiacnl of iiea.0zh.-3v in that 
eeothetica is concjrned '«ith tho aesthetio r9latiou;ihip of man to 
ra&litj in cßncrel^'srt is e. special exanple of this relationship in 
psrtionl.,!. ^.ut,sa?3 Morawski, -^ohvhom this textbook Is ^«^j^J^^J^^^ 
ia no expl?nntion whot "aesthotlc reiationship-'meana. ButSs^ i^j^artl^; 
seoonded bj ^.'I.3tolovloh In "Prodmöt eatetiki" (Objeot if aeathstioa). 

im 369 hero thst aesthetics is in 3oviet Hnsaia a philo- 
aophioal Alsolpline a.^iinfr -Ith r.nch iir.tters aa the "beantiful" and oo 
ve nhall soe latcr-the "3xtbl#ir.c" .th<; "trapio" and the "corrlcrl) on 
the level of rathor 19.c9rt.nry di i o:i s ai oua . li.H.) 

Chaptcr 2.- Y.V-nslOT oonsidera beaaty.the äUblime ,the tragioal 
the comical as aesthetio (inalities and defiuoa theo - enlgmaticallj; , 
aej« Morawaki- aa the sensno-ia propcrtiea of a givon ob.ject which ao^ai- 
re meaning owing to man .thej are proportica üaiaaxinaÄxicr character- 
ized h:j a aooiall^ deternined expreaaivitj . ü^aaty ib th3 foundation 
of thp role of mn in tho -.vorid. an o'oj .otivation of his deyelopment 
and freodom.l'his definition lloraivaki alpo oonsidars aa enisnatic. 
AccordiOG to Vansloy beant:? is not a propert^' of phj;öioal oojoota .The 
latter oooone beautiful in the prooeaa of hauianization in a social 
oontext. A willow doea not "weap" by it^olf. As against this Buxot 
eeea in the aesthetio qitalitj; th^ foeline of tho "f allnesa of li .0" 
l)ut ho denied that there nre nn^ objectira fotodationa of the feelitxg 
of bea.itjf. L.atolovich thinkr that ihc ph:?e,ical propcrtiea are the 
form of aOf.thstic pror.rt5r8 ;that humunization is their .ocial ooatoat 


related to human needa and interesta, 

Vanalov and itolovloh belrng to the group of "oDahchestvenniki" (oooial 

theorlsta) who maintain that aeathatio qTiBlitlea hare a social ori£,in 
while their opponenta ,the -^prlroanlkl" assert thelr natural ph^sioal 
ganeaia.fTho forner are to some extent aubjeotivists ,the latter object- 
ivlata in a Western aense).The "prirodnikl •• are represented bj? n.a. Mmi- 
trleva vjho asaerta that the lawa of beauty are the la^va of naturo,of ita 
harmony.s^metry and Proportion, //ithout donj-ing the social componont 
ahs ata^tje« that there are more primitive/atiranli''! 

* . . ■ ■ 

Aocording to Vanslov y;orks ofart reoreate the aeathetic 
quaiitiea to b^ fcund in rc-rlit;?, in a generalized oonoentrated wav. 
L.atolovioh ngraea v,dth hi in the nialn but adda that the artista reta 
an aasth^tioellr determinod i.,ago booause.he grasped the esaence of the 
phenor.enön in :nestion.He «lao cr.^s th^t^iüä »eet^ftio ideal .hould 
reprs-iont a rrogreasi^-c -7oria view.'i?!ic .me'aaa of preaentation ahould bo 
auch as to become transparent ü onoer. ling tiib oontanta. Jnorawakl ex- 
preaeoa ftVre do-ibta vrhethcr rccrcntior. of reallty is the eaaential pro- 
pertjy of the --crlc of r-rt nncL d^-.on.txatQa the reby. that h« is not a t-ne 
auppe:"ter of ITnrxist aosthotica- 

F.-^.ICcrri^snko re^octed "the. .social theorlea oj!, ^y-nalov.stno- 
vich and thfir adherents TasalöV, GolÄöutrioht and x'oahitnflv stating 
that auch propertles as sy-iriRtr^ ,jr7-irTrrSr-; ,parpo;.efiilnea3 are natural 
and onnnot be merely introdvoed bj man witiiout Tsail.7 existinK .He .^orted 
T^mitrleva but ;j*«© di3 tln^nislhad bet-;;se£. the pleaaant and the oeautifal 
attributin,^ the former to Imdscspee, natural ob^eots , and beauty to 
worka of srt.I.Astekhov joined Korns'leDkd in aoou3lng''V?5n3loV of 
ßubjectivism.He eapouted th^ thoories cf «;hsrnyoha78ki -In aaauming ahat 
beautj Is a propert;? of natural genera s Johas animala and men in the 
pericd of thoir greateat blooir., i.g. "perfootion" , "/opro^j? filo^iofii" 
(the leading Susslan phlloaophicml Journul-k.H. ) aoknowiedged in an 


artioie publi..hed in 1963( Ho.5) that diraitrievajKorniyonIcOjAstalühov, 

^egorov and Poapelov are right bat adds that the genösia of the aesthetio 
aeuse oannot be explained outside the aooie.i oontoxt and tho dialeotioa 
of objeotlve and aubjeotlve links • Borev wrote tl;^t uataiö has a meaning 
onl^ if it io aociially aaaiiiiiiated ,onoompassod b;; th^ prodiiotive prooeas. 
M.3 • Kagan thinks tbat aeathotlo q.'aalitipa have mcro a pbj^ohologioal 

than a 30oioiügioal origin. \ \ 

Aa for art V.A.Bazumny statös in the m^-ntioned ^'Osnov:?.," that 
tho work of ert erpresaee the mental reletloriship of laan to realitiy ; that 
it is the füllest ooncentratei maatering of tk realit^.It is a oenauoaa 
refleotloit of the truth of life,an ideational-eathetio asaeaanent of 
»eality^a creative procoaa based on the lawa of bexi^t:?. it ahov/a that 

■ *■ r '\ 

renliam mean a a differentiation of the woi^lcs of art.ri,i*Korn;,acnico 

asaerta tho oocfiitive role of art but rejectö the thcsoa of ö. Poapelov 

thi^t art iE oharaöterlzed 03^ ita ideologioal fucCtiön,Korni;^enko and 

• ■ *^'\ 

Astakhov think th^t art fulfills an ideologioal fcinotion by neans of aen- 

suoaa preaontation. Aooording to M.S.Zagan art iri^pliea an euotional and 

ideational "eng^ gement" wherebj; the oontent iö mor^ i portant than the 



HJlarkov (pbj/ohoiogy of tho theatre ) sees the origin of art in plaj 
linking ap witli the tradtion of Priedrioh achllier ar.d j.Huizlnga. ile 
atresoea the fictional iUuaioniatio «lenient, the -Tlrtuäl" in art. 
V.Tasalov ctresaea thö r9making of realitj;, the artii^tio form not msrei,7 
the oognitivr afpeot. Mmltrlera alao atres-ea thrt It i^. the RXtlstf c 
form thet dlstingixl.-hea art from re^isiit^; whlch It repreäenta. Form ia 
the isolating b<;rricr botwoen them. The posltlons of ^aaalov, Uarkov 
and Dimitriera are in thia rospeot exoeptiooal. '^he £eü?rui thesia ötate. 
that art Ip 3 cognitive form of representing realitj? ^u a äonsacas waj. 
is thi- also true of rnualo and architpoturev orcwalci dcacnds. It is 
* ^;^Qt ^ve anoc'xntor the problora of reallr.m. 

Tho fo-irth part of the book "Obnov;," is devoted to i-eaüam whereby 
>.V. TCaraßonov döals witü reali.m in g neral while Borev and i^edosh^vin 
denl i7Uh soo^.liit ioaii&m, Karagonov statea that realioin ig noither 
an aruxotic ar1jii-iju nor a würld view bufc an arti^tic method., a dialectlc. 
al link Of artiLtlc thinklng. I'. ü not a atj-le and it ooniprisea also 
nnxaio nnd arohiteotare.It presouts "the truth of life." i'he J.B*s8t dis- 
oilsion nbout r9allom^.iorawski aaaerta.atarted in 1957 but alroadj in 
1954 J.ülsberg attacked sieäo,.ä^^±n for having aaid that there wero two 
methoda of artl.tio oreation:i,üe realistic and the anti-realistio . äom 
treat rcaiism i.a a gäaGxai properti? ,ot;iiers aa a äiitorioal catagory 
oripinating in the Usnaiä^eoioo or in the 19. centuri^. It was aaid that 
there -.vpre diffsrent iciada of realiam.the oritical reallam(pariod of 
Snliehtemient) nnd aooiaxiat roallam, oren Homantic realisn .md revol- 
utionr^rv-dmooratio realiani. In all apooha realiara asserts tho oognitive 
fanotlon.thp oonoreto gencralization or typization. ^here Kay be a real- 
iam of a npyciel p6riod,r6alisin aa world view or aa meana of artistic 
x±n± structare of plot and psrsonalitioa. Hazurtmy stated thct this v;aa a 
method that dcea not idealiBQ nora mythologizo the preaented facta, 
<2he littirary oritio L.i'iinofeev states that the »r»-iri-»<r^ method ia the 
Präsentation of thoaghta and feelinga by aeana of aerxauoua piotiirea.not 
of iofical conoepta.The creative method ia the aesüiietio ideal, the style 
iü the individual iuality cf the artlst. 'i'he oharaoteristio of reallam 
aa a method of Oieation is the typicalltj of figurea end conditions, 
their probabillt:; in texma of life as again&t i.omantioiara. Acoordim? to 
ü.Lariain the terra "oroative laethod" is broeder than atyle^the latter 
may he individual or c groujp phGuononon.dociaiidt reaiiL,m ia thö only 
oreative method of our tlme,iü ia the aonaltion of styliatic nuxtj , 


Acoording to I.Hyzhicin »'oreative Biethod" neeiis the the idoational-aesthotic 

»»ÄÄK/of oreatlvlt^y ^7hile style ia a System of nutual links between the 
6lement;6 of a givüu work. Beaiiam as a st;;le ia tha grabp of purtiout^A 
evcnts in tlic light of the esaential soolo-historloal proooss* Boalistio 
preaotroa'iion slways exlatad but realisir es a stylo is the propertj of 
soüi) and tho best workB.Other stillos o?=inriot jho/evor, ho all raduoed to 
formell&n kKisaocaai aß anti-realiriin "broau?.e -nti-rea-lictio atyl^a aro often 

oonflicoing araong thenselvea* 

In hi3 book on "Aöothetio ir.oai lüäi creative 
method" A-uri;?an distiaguibhes betten themj^he Inttcr io tho ti^^^tüin of 

building Images oti the baaie of (^asesair^ont of realitj whila the aoathetio 
ideal !:> constitrtod by the common ideaa of r.ooipt^- cboat th./ poo;.aibllity 
of developitig a hcrmonloualy oonatitiited hiinnn boing» ?'ii5 ideal is the 
oore of artii^tio aotivity^ l*he avant-grrde ??rtleta euch ae ^andinsky and 
Pio^isao laok auch iuoal and create therefore vers» nb] jotirel^v in an 



elernentarj v*ay. If öuah ideal ia alive aa with sooiil tcalioi 
method iö a dynamio onö» 

In hia book ^^i^torioism aß n ncthod of aridoratand- 
ing the realietic ^ethod V.Itoeprov atates thct re^liim firat apioarod at 
the end of R3nr.iciGatioe,thö firat exaniple hrrlnj^ born'^Don Tcuijoto'* • Theie 
rre d/fferent avonuea of approaoh in realipm ,thTir> fcr in^tance in Q^^C^ 
19.oentiry nf^taralicm» ^ooialist realiarn Iß snperlor b^^oanae hfj'e the 
oreator presents realit^ In the light of tr^^ idcrls , of the perspective 
cf the a^th^ntic historicsl proce^s. In art ap?»rt from Typi^iation (i.t. 
Its GOgnitive fauction) there is a nornf>.tive f-jn?.tion : ideali^ationi 
which ;\o .'jver jbecomea superflaoua in aooialiot rer.liar*. i^orav;üki ia of 
the orjinlon that Dneprov»b at*atement tio the effect that roalism -not 
cnl-^ a3 a llterary trend but aa a oreativ^ neth.od-aror.e in Ihc 19. oeatary 


ia erroneoüs« 

V. Ra^äiiTinyi adopta ühe ideaa of Li.Verwoifn if declarin2^ th: t reaii>ia 






« ia a ph.y8iopl..^.8tio aethod(prooeeding from Image to ideaa) while Homant- ^ 

icism ia an ideoplastio methodrfrom Idea to imge), " \ 

As for realiom as a univars al theor? a.^pllcable to pI;. axts il.S.Kagan 
reasona thet ever;^ art reflects reslity.-has archltecture or ornamenta 
refleot siüiraetry and Proportion, the flatneaa aml the elevations of thö 
World; msio oontaina onoiaatopoetio eiemonts and danoo repsata arrangements 
of motione in everjrda? ilfe. Bat tue rairaetlo eleni^nta of erohitecture 
and inuvdo ar« unlrnportfjnt^ .orawakl adda, -• 

Abatraot art ia treated an p. almriletiba of rrt. V.U. Prokoflev 
K»HÄ oonsiders Ualevioh and Monftrian ( th? gpotnetricol aspeot of abstrao- 
tionlam) and /-andinskj and Pollookf ita teohisrt phgec) es a retnrn to barb- 
arism. AccorcUng tc hin nbsijr?ictionißn eli-inotes the cog-itive fanctlon 
of art BB form of ethio^l or aesthetloQl -asesanent of the world. Hazurnnyl 
also röasons in a similar wa:^: trhere thero iü no roference to the world 
thera lo no art. I.R^7:ihkin ooasiders dodeosphonlo muiic fA .^ofioenberg) 
aa paeudo-art, Ihe muciccloEi..t J..v:roriivv ^tatss that arts are dividod 
inte representational and exnrcssiye ones ; thR Intter (musio and danoe ) 
also refleot realitj? .nanirly nuL^>ic by meana of olernenta of intonatlon. 

Considering archltocturc H.A. Iraner stntea that srohlteot'Tre 
refleots the exiäting ideolcgy and aer.thetic ideala.Tts realiom U alao 
the consiötenoy of a bailling r^ad it? fanctior. and form; the oonoiatenoy 
of a building and its;rialß, conr trr.ction and teohni .ue •i^orawaki orlti- 
GizQs tJaese theories: dopandonoe on 3oii»f3 elenents of reality, he /,a};3 
lä not a refieotion of realit^; and donou cing cnb^traotioniara aa 
pGeadc-art is Juat as arbitrery aa ßarov^8 statcrr.ent that arahiteoture 
is not art but engineering* i^odeoaphonio and ooncrcte nu.;io,h<^ oontinues 
havc no inton^tion ae basio olement and on the othor hand alr^ady Hepel 

and Schelling ctatod that lauaio^ Is a refieotion of s-ibjoctirn realitj? 
80 thnt rJTPn liTnTxista oo^Jld talk of its p3^c:io-c.ocinl brsls.Coordination 
Of maaio^xprosaion and psyohosoo'al ^Icmonta le liff ieiilt>7onl;7 sach 



eleraents aa joy or aorrov; oould "be fcund in musio^it would bo therefore 

preferable to avold such terics aa realiam in musioal theory and the 

theory of intomioio?i of Ai^'Ußflev and YaTorakl s^tould be applied onlj 

wl th Oi-ution* -oFie/thcorlstB ±Tr::ÄSDrs±5C üee in musio Liie e^uivalout of 

mcYerri-snuS- i»G, homonorphy cf niovGLnont/S • i'iifc aasumption oj: Soviot 

aeithetica ,say8 Morawski, that realiam iö a aaivörsal artic.tio oategory 

is .just aa extremiat ac the tbieais that abotraot printing £;nd nusio are 

al?o realistio. Tbs mort i portant Llar^ist aesthsttician of o t Century 

(?• Lul:<^.cs aVanoed reoeritly in hiß bool: ^J)ic L'igenart dea Aesthetiochen" 

(The originalit^ of the aeßofKifttioal) fl953) the conoeptiou that oy^3ry 

human or Nation is a refieotion of realit;;;« Jiut horo the genetic and the 

gno&Qologieal aspeot are oonfused» Geuötlcalij (2vcri' oreation dopenda 

on oonditions of reality bat ^very arti^tia '^oxi^ am^t not bo a oopy of 

reality« IJiyzhiiin do^a not ii3Q tht^ tariii "raaü-iu'^ for jua^io «H'i laerely 

3aya that muaio expreasea emotional procoaeea and rh;;;whn teuporal mptor 


Another proolen ia \7hotaor ühoro \.h_ pxogroüs in ort ^m^ T/hether 

aooialiot roalisn ineanB deoper anu bc ttor art than othor kinda of reolism, 

o this iö o f f i r-:.;.; i ^1»<P! atiaoo HTo'c idl ia t r 

roalicm re- 

ihe Sovint anav;or t^ ^..*v. -.^ c .u-.-.. .*.. v^.^^ 

Eiorea th© antinoiny between ideal aul rcality f»nd giyes the boat i^iea 

of trne eyents. HasuTuavi ctr.te2 tliat the ..-i^ana of üxprosäion b^ocino 

riohor and also that the aubjoot ruitl^or cl arl. ia enricliod ;..nd that ,. /\ 

Ti<iw kinda of art ariüe bat all thia «lo^a uot hetJjM J^^^^^-i^ci ac 3 er ding 
to ivlorawsici. 

Aooording tc Lhe ^'^arxist oanon er*- .ihould be '»national" 

I.e. deatined for the maaaea so thct the dii^tlnjl lorx bct\«cen letii^nsd 
art and folkay art is abolished «Art ohnuld r.l;ü.c bo a "party conacioua " 
art i«e# oonsoious cf aocio-hictoxior.l dynui Ifin. Dn^r^rov thirka that there 
are r^iny (ST^ within r^alism and this loi^ds u.^ üio the luestion of the 
"p.tvle of our modern tl ea'' and the soodlcd luodara ort v.hioh i^ the 


subjeot of 

Chapter 4# Aooordiag to Ü.A» Dlmitrieva eoonomj^ of raeana 

of exi)re&cion and oondeneation of conventß are charccterirntioo of the 

20tli Century? st^-le* 31gns r6place dcccriptious, Tliib st^jle sleo reverta 

to ioö linJi vjith crchitsct'irt? In public buildinga (freetoeoa, peinted 

in beooming 
gla8£ Windows )f]axy3tki±2:rck2Cl±ÄtSL|^ montuiiental •Applied to interolra 

cf homes thls st^le r^vertß tl^o to its ocniiectlon v;itli evory dn? life^ 

as aprled art* -^^^conioitj anö ezprGGsivit^' predoirdnr.te and therefore 

ßraphic art i3 the TACst noflarn "bocauoe it is the mojt expressive ono» 

Hero the terrr "uslovao^e'V i.e. tho "fioticioiia'' , the "artifi- 

cial^the forrnal is x^he noat appropriaie «Ig ueans the oonorara to mere 

exterior öimilarit^/.This i^ what V.l'urbin torms the Eiain Ingredtent of 

art. IIo links film not ^;?ith l'teratare bu t v-vith ausic and nathematicD , 


vith "pootry'^ of ir.overaenta or the dl,^lctic£ of the thinlrlnjr proceea. 

and with che "geonotry'* of noveLionts i^»;. the djuanic of objectiro pro- 
oesscs, ^2iiQ *'moaarai.itic '' thccos cf Dirltrieva and Turbin led to 
oounter-attaoka.Dnoprov deoiared that revi liition^^ir^ art ond noäernistio 
attitudeß arc not ooinplcmentarj/ but oontradictorj »The fcrnier ia baeed 
on matcrialism^thc latter u ou idCc.llBn.i^or uht forcier contente condition 


forra ,to nod^rnism oontenta are iudiff öxcnt« A Llarztüt should diiferon- 

tiete betv/een the 3t:/leö of Oorki enpi l^aiilkncr boGau:iC thv?ir points of 

vicv/ ara difförent» Froia Proußt «o Jo^oc, Zafliü ,£Uid T^ol^bc-Grrillet 

of the oreatlve metho d 
thcre ie iaoreaaing Bub j eoViv'i^iHtiou/in riCdoxniüm ^nnd th-refore 

decadcatism. Gooialist realiam ivent in an oppo:jite dir.ection* Morav/aki 

oritioi^rs DBieprov in sa^ing that amiritziiXE analvi^.is cf tho oritioal 

reriion cf Moravia, Hening^^/ay ,::ille'r,nüi:iär^iue aüd :Jharlln '^ouid l^ad hin 

to othor reaiilts. 


RazuLinyi acknovjlodgca thO ''nslornoyo'' i.e. diat^oe from 
ro^.lit^ in that k»± an art work oanaot bö a nataral cvcnt Tike a fire; 
that it Ut-ea 9:;iribolic oxpreaaiona c.g. pL^rs pro toto -ocording to 


natioiial tradltiona and hiotorio&l ocaditic-as ; tiiat it sometinea exagger- 
atea-aa in oarioatiire-. Hovvever ,rogard for »'ualovnoye'' i#o. aymboli^-ation, 
ab>)revial;ion,t!ie infiiUon of the phantasticai^Rasuiimyi aaj^a, leada to (^<m^tA 
i^^^^trcbö^H^^; J^/tiio rcrual aad uhiö dazxumyi rejects aa psendonovelt:;^ 


-Iä tibo plaöliic rtiö acdGru i^t^le ia an appeal for di;^tortion of reality. 
Razuimv;! coudeniri. th^reicxt i^uiilrieva and defenda ps5Chologism{-r3j 30ted 
bs Tiixblu-A ris 4rt il.ia ' 0^l; -4.u. rGL.llt^% He dabba those who would experimont 
witb foi?ni alciic «aattlictio hooligaus". ß.Y. 7i&hniakov U aven mox8 radlo- 
al .He döuicb tho valiic; of aü. uoaoxaibtio trenda.He acousas :^nitrieva of 
forinali3iii and ueolarea tiliati laere are ao Comion valuos of oontenporery 
critioal rep/il.n -nd oOciaLu^t reaiisifetiere ia no "modern ati;lcMof cur 
time) ^^^S^y'iaiolo^'ioal styles.lle woald not put Arthui' Uiller and Uoravia 

<f\ CK. /i(Ä/>— 

■ aholokhov. 

Attacks on abstraotionism are wldespread. 
V.N.Prokcriöv (lenouaces it r.s a prlirdtire in.^tlnctual creative prooesa 
vdth UÄ roaotioner;^ idecloes at the tootiiom.It was reallj oreatad ia Hu.ala, 
he saja, during the reaoUoaar;/ period (1907- 13) aud waa then oombated 
b^ ^-arxists. Razurnn;;i aä:;'6 that ab&traotioniam doea not rerresent roalit.v- 
an original sin.- M.S.Kogan ia^fß that ntostract art rriay be an oranxent 
bat 05:anot be an easel-painting and has no aense. Accordlng to a.üJ^ozhniagun 
ta fouadatloa is anfci-binianl: tio.idealistio bourgeois philcsophy .it ie 

adf -iimsloa,lüoo.-.prehenaiblc,i« re.jocta th9 reflection of reolity 
,nd distox-ta it. ÄS an art of pura form it i^ eaoapist bat ans- peroeption 
,f jTorTa is liakod nith an preteuda to diaoover a reality aui 
5enürl3 w'odor. ph:;3iC3 and it linl^a up «ith the «Presaion of prirdtive 

peoplci.- It i.i a .ni'3tor3f,äa;;8 Morawski ,v;hy Uoehniagto eu>±x the arohiteot 
r^onlua a-'ions the abBtretioniatü-what he haa to do vvith l.'-alevich or Kundin- 
Bky and wh:^ 3pougler or O.G. Jung a:re et the bacia of abatraotioniam aa 

ita iiAT^saiate öource. 

i)^t,rieva ooinbats ab^traot^n^Tj^i onother way 


3he acknowledgos that toneg may exlata independently but not suoh 
:Porin3 aa oolora tni llnos In palntlng beoauae they never ooour indepen- 
dentl;? but are al^aj-B 15.nkPd vdtji cb.f^ots. Tut the elfment t.bpt trana- 

^/S'^Jii^*'' ^"^'^ ^^'^ *" pcoordiiifT *^o iVinitriova f orm.Morawakl ,A^C^^*<^ -^ 
»^4Q«/fh;:,t while Plekhanov rejocted abatrec'j .•xrt,.T.imaeh&rski waa 
iore oirotunspeot, 

Chapter 5. fOn form and .«rtl .tic sanarn) , Aoocrding, A./9gorov üontenta 
detf.rmine forri ,its progressive or regressive chnraoter and its 
aeat/ißtio value. Tli- oompooition la the r,t;rnotur9 of contents snd 
the foria Is tfie wajr ♦-.he contenta orrrar.ised.V?,nfloT »a concept 
Of fora ana oontrnta i.8 si ilar hnt h^ zeoe. ^^hree ^hrsea of artistio 
Be^eotion; subjeot ma.tterfthe üHoca of realit- to -;hioK the artist 
turnal.the tliem^ and tha ooatents i.e. ^.he ?:nnerall3ed,ooncretized 
and Gondenced reallt^^.Wiiile taere is a muturl do-oenrlenop >^-^^- 

ooutanta and means of eXi>rea9ion,forra Is rel-tly^ly i^^^dependent sinäa 
it roay be fused with nan:; kad9 of contenta. but th'-^ rjre^tlve foroe i\l\ 



the ocntant3.-%on tho llt^-rar^; hl^ a,Hci?30Y m^-intnined the 
Insopfirability of form and oontpr3ta,thls wri3 lenoTinond as nn orror, 
LUS^Xagan said tfiat 'v^ e c-neot trnth froF oont-^r^t?! --/HUp for^ri ig nl\7a.7a 
ao-^.etfiing artificial fuslovno^«). 

LJJ »StoloviGh rarintnined tK^^t -^ot"^ r^^r^^' \y^-yr(% r^^^r*^ rr,^,^.. 4.>,~,^ ^,^ 
Uho öame dement irir..7 be oonal ierod ?or;rtiTiiC3 es '^oontc-^' and then 
se '^forni", Vanalov,Kagan,3tolovioh, Vinosrcidoy,D/'!itriera, »lledonli^Tvto 
aoknowledgo the relati-xe indnpondrncf? of form rtnd ^^ro inolincd to 
aasumc thiit Ihe totrlit:; of the mfiana of cocpreaöion conti bitut^^a the 
mala valiie o f some works of art .l/iiiitriova ind ir.aran -^t^t-^J -inoident- 
elly onl,7-that form i3 the olernent orent5.n^ nrt. 

All arto aefloct roalit^» but differant aapeota of it, Paint- 
iii^ Is a tvo-dimeubiüMal axt repraaenting tridimeaaiünai figurea 


litexature io an art wkioii maj owing to its verbal oharaoter diöplaj 
ß wealth cf eyent8,flgar6a and relationa; musla Is an rrt where ex- 
piossivitj doiaiaetes aad danoe an art of or^aiiized rb^thm of movementa 
o£ 'jiie iiaiüau uodj^. V •iL.^aikateröäuhikcy uadertook a olasöiflop.tion of 
the arua on :;'ie baaia of the prinoiple of the dearee cf)grasp»I?^ 

who oouiionta of r^^plity and on the baala of vjhether reflection or 
ezr)ree£ior^ dominatea them, ^^i» also dlBtlnpriir^h^'d theiii aooording to 
'ih.^ ifioans of percöption and exoc^ition» D/ni'ur'.e7e 3tf?.tes that the 
pl^^ttiü arta are direotl:; repreeentation«! ,litf^rntnre onlj? iadireotly; 
but Tveoizol^ beccvtioe of thia itaohieves exr) esslvo r.nd Intsll^otaal 
val'ies .ihe al^o foliowa Leasing in diatinfi^uiofiin?; ^patial and terap- 

orai artö and ütiatüs tixat art no^ex oopiea bnt rei-^roducsa^ 

i ■ ■ ■ ■ 

G.Bori^öviici ^tati^'J fcbat the main error in architGctar-^.l ^Jieor;; vbB 
tlie aeaimption that there exiats onl:^ one porfeol; ciodol of architr>ct- 
ure^'lihe anoieav one imd ita derivativoa. ilowevcr ,evon buildlngs dono 
of rrefafcricatöü parte are not wor^e than the Parther.ori or the Pazisi 

oliapel fiUoxence ; • 

Ghaptor 6 (Applica art.) aince 1958 a Journal »^Deicorativnoja Iskuatvo 
333R appcarE eJited bj^ k.-'-adur and K.ILantor* It deal3 vvitli ap. üod 
art aö also did a book by Il.a.Kagan and a atnA7 "Ttio Moathetics cf 
tpohixioiam" Vj Va/J^a;iaalov« KaG»^ aees the oontenta of the -;ork of 
art in its "pootionl pafchos". and suoh elnment iz also erlAen'c accorA- 
iug -^0 hin in rago,gla8se8i.c. the oroationr of cp-pllor! prt.In '•a-oous- 
lug li.ncitJi-tlls tiixa taneta of thf? (?ea*;alt tr or? he nffirTTs.hcwcvpr , 
tüat üue a£,3ColaiiionB ciround a'^g'^atElt" nr« not tbr r-amt of s psyclio- 
plij^sical procf&O but due to the sooIbI histcry of Hwnkird, Tiiie iclnd 
ox uxt &130 expressea bhe ideational-emotiTe world-viflw relationalilp 
of the fjrtist to hie hi;itorioai rcalit??. Bat thls art do^s not ex- 
prsauss axporiöuoea as dooa muaio bat moods. Its «xpreaa Ire -formal 


propertlea form th? it-jle of an epooh. Ifc ia aoting as an "eoieblo" 

mltrievan) :rhe ornomont crg- 
anijjea tho -^urfnoe^; if 30011.3 r.riOu.i iö caa eaaiij? be h<irnon5.aed wlth 
Itö übjoct; If it r^nreront t;i>^..uJ.o uö r.ust be soheniatizerl bat 
It iuc;:y iij^^ye Hilmetjc fceprecent£tioUi.i) intrusione. 

Ta^^ealov 00Tnb->t3 '^teohnlcisia" Kithin ^he fleld of indn:>trial 
art i^nd reirtea it to C •i^n^r^ngl: r ' o buuk ^^jjex .^öCLooh und die '^'eaiinil:" (1932 
(Uaii and tlie tsohnlonl). ni> tritoo tliat "tacimi.iu.e" drivet out -^deology, 
it> io a fetioiii/jatiüia cjf toolo- a boiurgüoia lueoioßVy ,por oiruilar reasons 
he coirib ito Lihiel atid Frcinoaütel v4u id^auli:^ U^e technioal ^nid the aesth- 
etical rerfeotion. He also oriticiüi,a '*oouot/uotiviariV* repreüeiated 
acccr.Mvi-g to him by Mio'^ vnn dö.v Aoiio ( whiüago). TechnloieM in arohi- 
teoture is oombatod aß an aiiülogue to r.botrootioniam in pninting. Tho 
mobiles of Alexander OrläPtr rre euppo^od to be a link bctv;ecn tho two. 

'; \r-wer 7 fOthfir '^oßthotic ootc^xriaa« 

Tf ro*:.lis!iL ic sri neat' etio Cl^.e;_^orv ,it transoends ''beaut^;" jnd ia 

r'^'^.o linl:ed ^;^'ith th. tr.cj^ ioal ,t!i. ociiioal and tlie HUbline wliich 

arc aocording to 3oviet writ^rs ui.i'ltxout speoiea of the "aestliebali" 

tho littor me^-nins "oenGuoi:-.!^ ccucict^ aireot e-ipraaaion of idaaC" 

In ^'O'^^noTj . •••^ it i: ^aid t]:.\l x£;volatiüaar,7 r.nd post-revolationnt^^ 

timet; re iuire fi heroio rtancc ^nd the ooxrespondiug aesthotioal cate- 

f3U bli: nit:;» 
p-^ov^' i s/iSitSB^dtpc Tf \v3 raoc^t tlu'Oör.vUii^a^' n-tural fotcea and oppo^e 

the victorioualy ,;70 hav^:* r. Tecj-iu- üf oujxiiiiity xiirthermore if we ^*^^ Y^'/h^ 

ö ' ^ 

v^it^h acoial öTents ^lrt^ deoiülre importaiice to manlind« (These 

ara tuo difföiöut thin£:s,sa5'ß Llcra'v;w;ki,i>ud xtKii'^ bubiimitv ia pjrhaps 
an ethiool (not ar- aestliotical) ^'.\4:^^ot^\ 

eJ.Slijberg statea «ihut ths txagiO'ii ia tho reault of a 00m- 
bct of tho hero vath reaJ. foro'ja,iiot of a fate or of guilt, ^jx^uV^. .ond 
Smoiianinov spot the tr?^: ioal if tho haxo üi;i3 in the defense of 
now idoas whioh onnrot ooniner or of au old oider whioh is doomed« 



"U* tragio hero mu^t bo aotive ,3xtr not passiye aa the figares of 
Böcketl; loiiei^oo^aad Plnlcr, saya V.Prolov. In his tcok "On the trsgioal" 

'■>^' >y\.v^ v.'iiicli aaaiu'tti iu,.ortrxiti^ pnd deop despair tlirt turne Into 
the triiunph cf •r'--.'urcotio.j trngloal.ln th« T?enaiessnce the trogio 
i'<^?'->.lt!j rroip the ocllioloa of tho indlvidnal with the atato of the 
x\a'ld (3'i->i,o.3ii.,.>.ß), j., Mjg cii,,ü8iüQl dranaf0ornGlll3,I?c,cinuO the 
hftro l^ecoccn rn ir.carnRbica of duty .iaaividaoL feeliug periuhcs in 
th« ocnflict vlth Tfiason fuoclü loroca). Rom-ntiolan haa :. lyricol 



end :Bs;rrn). ^^oderiUsrr; ic ^ut üraö degradss the iadividaal oncL 

doatli. fB-o^ett>,0-rni-,S rtre), 3at tha laok of an id3al and the aeuse- 
ox iixe 

leca-ißcB/ao uot ^enoxota the trg-iüai sirioe the lattsx roiuirea jcä the 

doj:eat of an potivs r^rcouaüt^ . lau truiy i^rcgicai dweiis ia the 
revol'j.tion.*ir:^ oonf .ict uf revuxatxouaXii? foroea with the ra.';.otioa;»j.r^ 
oncs* Without n nation/oh. a...o io^'üapt^^^ wi thout hiia a nation U 
inoomplo'oG. 11. Si* X;j,gjm Or.ils l;ho Borcy v&riety of traged;y the^öptim- 
i3tio/' traged.v/o^^t; thoi^e i. e\lao (K'-pcasi .listio '' traged^v ^hen the 
ie^o.ql cvnnot be ^iphcld /-.ud j.)oric.ho8 v/ith thf hero» 

A300r:^ln,|v to Bornv v/ho v/rote also riborrt thr "oo^iiiodl" 
tho l^tt'^r «:jf 13-13 '«^hen t'.e coiallv obf^olete ,th(? ^olltio.'ill:/ re-otlon- 
ntr? '^.nd nior-^ll? Ä»1i:t±i:'iabbc obnoxioua pretenda to vitality. mis ocralo l^^j^^/ 
frora tho ridicnlons in tha'v the laöt&r iM.5E/ h ive "aeßtaoticj corinota- 
tlon^^. A^ cpnin-.t 3uoh e-iapic iiUghucjr coinioal l^.iightcr refera to 
a ]Of'^-tlvl)ioh prctßndö to üo -„xivü L\ud h yo a mcouing.Tnn ooraicnl is 
t;hf=* ocutr-dlct:Lon of f or^ ^rnd contcntSj^or essence rno. itg appenranoe, 
,.oh B T'Oint of View ±i Borev bL^uxö/v;ith L.Yevninr jo^^jacborg, L.Timo- 

ferVjL-ihchepilcva und l^^IUkolt.ev". Bat .wOrav;öki thinks thnt Borev 

hae .V.oluti.ed one of^the tragioal and the oomioal whioh is 

t-nfc from a social polnt ox vxe« uuu -...*- ^ "^ /) 

Bor.v Ixunorjf and Batire .ithin the oondonl. 
Tue. ^hould b. aiBti.^,■.i.hod acoordiug to ooviot authors not »ooo.d- 
in, ,;. of «xpre.eion .at the attitade of the artl.t to.«rd 
:e.IIt,. Ys^in. .^.ees three forma of the ridioaloaa ( 
3t ob.1-ot£ or unaaxal forn nnd prent oontrabts, at: 

^ ^, 4.-«v,c w'ilf.ti mpv also lend to th - tr-igioal. 
also nt InaoluDl- ccntradiotxons vMi^h "icv a^ 

-, -.4- A^-h thf oroblec. of Satire. Its rropcr 

lacejSitivfc „ -. o rstt-j bureaaorat 

„0. ,f uo „t,re (in .ovl-. ^.sla) ..l-o f,. ..=o.ä ..If o£ .he 
..i,«.s.It ™» ..« .t thct tm. th=t„t .oclet, wa. U«ele.s 

.nd or.i^ th. r^f.±afc h.-^^.ntB of oapitalisu aio .v-J^- 
• 1^ ^yi^.r^ i-K-t ^'vnr-^ Satire re-iiireb c. po^ixix^ 

..,-.,.ono,..i.o^«v ,,hin.. tvt ovixs =»P.-=U.U, ..ose ...a«n 


,e.n orX,' ..:.:.» nato.Axl.totl., ,l..oX rna aUexn,....s,..X ..he ...tcrlo- 
oeai" or.i., Veatern bat alao 

, , .-ory of m >^. Ov.ianr.ilcoT .ucovnr.sO*. ^. not o.l, 

N i^u^^-^rtft h'it it trrmlTi: tcß tK -'i tili 

n^'^r^t.^l {Indiaii and ^.nin..?»oi / 

•viHi Zh. T.arräruova "B^saya on the aiot.rj 

._ elan nonographa. i'irat of all on- b, .ü .. 

com.» .«0HeUC3 f ro.^ P.«. r..n Co *r . ....H-^r 

1 „lo fhn inv.>btiErttJ.on OX tho «hoat^ni; 
Ue oonoeivea -a A^U^rxist. .n.l:;ais the inv.-btig. 


thr, ista uoatiry bat vAoxhü Diderot.!!^ oonr.lderod Slxaoespe^u'e e3 a 
"n-.U.>" po(.l; on a :ar .it;h Uoraur . In hlr "Briefe sar Befördorcmr, 
itr ]Ix.-.anrlta1; h- raLotivized Ut.rRture aooordlnß i.o Pe.-lod,3cosrapto 
and naJ.onal:/oi', bat h- oouaiiorod doanlte t!mt Greclr. .-^t 53 uiis 
poi-fect ,r,od«l. -'Iho rol. ofi^ue. de atael I3^scd iu a .00k 
of T>,G. r<oi;:ov"Bet\vuci:. ülaosioisia and Komantioism" . 

V.-ii'.3n-:er dl-.:;u.M.«a "-he . xoblens of i'olklvre in tue h.iiitcry of 
aeat >er.io8." h. ocAsi.ers fulkiore as al .voirltual cature o.-cpr«B8ing 
the aeefu-tio worlä vi.^w or th« n^oesea of the pocplo. it U charaot- 
«ri.'.ed b7 bho nnit^ cf eil .^ti^bxo oatordtn.tod to 
tho vord,r).v Ita oonfciauic;^ uud traditiomiliara, its ooi.le^tip -enesis 

and t;io' dirooT; iiiUc -..-loh cvorjdai, iife.'i;it,.Be proprrtirÜV^^e. ^i^ (SkCT 
ginn! t.-.nooue .Willi,, (Juöov' - vtiuS^ uuij ttuovv ligkt on "r>t.ticrialitJ:)" 
frir^r.T.oKt» ) ,as jiflt^icieax of i-arxiat yeBLIietto&,GUüev' s pcititre 

rttitncc to-warf eli thoco v;iio te« in folklore tho ^circe of art rnd 

11t- ''-•^ uro M^,t opr-enr dublons,:viorawsl:i ctuas up, 

A hir.tcrj; of European art from antlialt:y tili tfio 

er.d of the I3th ofintury was writton hy -.^ail-Vipper and TJÜ. Llvcnova, 

It doals mth mvt:-,lc,danoe tlie theatx« a«d the plaatio arta. The study 
anov,a the axapaxity of sia^4*i«a« in art and in «tk/theory ,'or instanco 
in the 17tf. aud 18th aUo appa.ra thab Uie fö^orj"of 
Plaatic ar.£^ft4..,:öj^,,.ti._ ^.^^ ^q^, cnifcury ,f ollowod by the theory 
Of mi.sic ..nd the tlasctiÄ. 2nt cnl^ in thc 18th 09ntary^v.or6'fciiecr^ 
of c.'t aad ^satasüios filiy dev'aoped.Oth« cclloctive works deal 
'^itii .he hi.tprj^ ,- ..esOkeUc thoaght in anti^uity aaä iu tho uiödla 
sges r^lc.oov.- 19^1 ) ki?a-tK4::fil..t;o,y of aasth.Uc tU^u^ht,,!;,, paedem 

^ ■- 

mat^xiala frora antl^ulty to^|Kai2^ance^,It iuoiiid.a:i^i.auiaii^;indian 
and Jhiucae iraterialsVKtircpocsntrisio iß avoid^ä;Tä3;-iat^od^()1^^3 
are wriU.n by ioaculod-a^l. soholärs: ; for'^U^kfty dhac^t^v aad 
Loaev. fo.- th. :-.iddle agca -3ubov; Vinoe^/adov lor Ö4.ixi^, Alikhanova 
for ludia und Eazhdan för' Byzi^n.Uuaru-''4_ ^hoit aestlifctip^dict'ronajri;" 
waa publDiehed by ü^P.Ovsiaaiiikoy andV.Ha»a;iUV,l.,'tr36^1?./'L''':''-"^ '"' 

rublloation^ ^dehiln6V.i-4l9tiy'ooriiary''mi3äiäri tlfe^^ 
such aa BolirisW .^^i^O^^^?7?*i,Dabrciuo,oy.?isar3v,. 3aXt.:];o7-3hohodria 
and Tolstoy are oontirittii^g;t&Un^ÄSfr|fet/ldli^^ g-:Bci;^fi^kl .nd 

Arethqttce oute i de üaaaia -.iou-.,.c:i'.tial- b;gin.., to b" 
^. .. ,^^,,^äiJ2|svious^jc.oujid^r.ed_^^ ^ ■ 

Btaaieu./7HeInIT,^ 5^...i<s;-9r waa pu^liä^T-^s-v^eil ss ths liiLioiy 

of eebt.N.- M.icE, of Kiihn ond Gilbert, ihe ■'Ac^thetio" or%Wöl*3i»^Hfi^t^^nn 

the 'atrdfr. 5£tot:.czne"fAestl;otlc aiidic^) of Konian Ing-rder., t,he 

treal.:-sea of Fr.rnl' L. Wright on arcaiUcture.tho.e of Vilr.;' -Tcavet 

cn l;i.9 thüa'uro .ver? trnr.3J.c-t.3d. cthcr werke cn fc^sign aosthotioa 

ars ,oiG:.ic;;.l^,lfcgorov wioto a book on tlie"fit cotiouar:^ natare of 

Lh'; i-rai^eat bonr-üoit aesthctios' whioli atU.o^a ^nbjeotlTi.t fhilosophy 

ao a bcGis of boargeola aeythetios,nw.i5ly its SÄtrorniöt verdien: Thomian 


CroööMoiii, BcrgüGn^ion ,i^reud» iön^ Jung:» ißn exlstentialism and formliam; 
furuhermoru aö J.ts iTiodeiv^te Version:^»ß prr.gmatisra and L.Ilamford^a 
tecLuiüioiJi. It alao EbtacL:^ uäc- "reviaicuic.m" of Liikaos and Vidniar 
(i'ugo^j.aVci^ßtli.'uioiaiis; ..•-;'•; Juxo i^ for thii fira-c time uh&t tiie boviat 
reaciw gut .^;.üI. aa ü-il,.uuövi luxoruüätiiün« But it tranüniit& ao ti-ue krjo?/- 
Ied.[^i3 ^Loui ;..^e sat jic;t,i;.a^u i^oxaviski, a^^axt i^rom a fevi/ fragaients of tiiö 
ideaa of H^^iritiiia^ üx^üüa,IJGXe>acu,bOiiiü oriticta rörri^rks on ^fread'c in- 
ütlli.Glav^l:ii;la^d a oharactoiisatioti of the aeetiiGtics of Dev^ej?« But one 
may as]i:,i,.ox\uDöx.i porcioa, whj? Mari^:ain is cellea fiere a subjfctive Ideal- 
ist if be l'v ;'0all^ an objoctiv^ ono (nanieli? a Thonietl; whj? Herbert 
Head ±ä 11,03 "booorac ülic saiao klnd of i-Kalist as Oroo« or Bergson and 
what li'.ie Annrioa.i '^homas I.-uriro aa& Lo fto ar^ong ^jtiem beiag reaiiy a 
ratioriaii^t , It ^co:^^ c^at oliio ojourred oaoause hc did not exclude 
a fai'-ih iu üod. A.: fjr i^oad^..orav;3iLi saya,hö ia a J^mp:» iat v^'ith eooio- 
Icgioc'l tanderioleSaOnö na;>' alao ack v/iiy exiötf^nti^^li.^t nesth^'tica ar-j 
öxeinplified l);^' 0::imus not b,v tiuidQggcr and v/liy ll ia/gero oloye to 
'^erupath^" v/Iiich aro^e iiadcr different cirouaBtarices.^ifiro exist.^nüial- 
iaoi and ^'s.gtX'^-^ arc aiAited in a clia^^t^r eatitlog "ih^ ©namies of reaacn 


and truuh" öii;hoii,7;h tiic^,' have nctliiag in cor^raon^ 

i'f:£,orov attrok. revi3iöaic.m aai^ing that iu doeß not 

"purty 5ai.^ir j t^' (ivxtvinoct» ) in urtana öGcaabC it £.a7a tiiao art doea 

not ri-:ii.e(;t realit;;«But Georg ^uü-aa» certainiy äü<-B not rejeot ülit- 

lutlor ooncejtfica and ab for \}iu^.\»'^ apirit, he is com^inoed that/ reuiistio 

ru ao üUc^h is pcriauatca by gip.oa^pirit a'a?\7a;j^mä tnat tue <:rt*it:.t«ö 

partiuuiLir pclitioal pJiil» sox'iiy 1« v;xthout raoanine:. If tiii& ia eraroneoua 


LwL'-ciOQ woui.d 05 a •iicoording to D,F»Kozlov»s "Agrini^.t rcvi- 

liiüuio.iA in iaeatlic tiG9" ,r<3Yi?.iouiGrx conr.tfltü in thc? rpjnc^^von of the 
theori- of rcf". 'ction^of the role of I'arxist world viow In ertistio 
OiCativ-'.t;7 ,oi: ti'it part^' .apirli/ in art^üf tlio direoticnal roie of tue 


Llfahit25,Lukao3,Raphael,Leföbvre and Kooh» 

i t ' 

^orawaki haa a long digreasion about a new approaoh to 
\he aeathetics of ^-arx and iängela whioh he woald suggest. There ahould 

be atadaea how the autonomous aeathetio attitudea at hls time in- 
fluenoed his ideas.Here the baalo conatruction ahould be hlatorlciam 
i»e, the graap of the artiatkc work in Its genetlc gnoseological and 
funotional oontext. The atarting point should walv/a^/s be the aremark 
of Marx thatthe obj otive [Ualit^ aeathetio ia harmon-» (meanare , 
that aeathetio experienoe ia autotelio (i.e. diainterested MR) 
it.e, a oertain diatanoe from the aubject and a free play of all 
payohioal powera.Marx and Bngela ahared aome oonviotiona with that 
of their time for inatanoe the one about the eternal validit;? of the 
öreek model. 








saka v2 a revoi\»i;i 0^45.1';/ tcudsnoicisnosii cf zlie draina.IIorallo^j oppoöea 
thos*3 iuoas eiiarpl^ uit unjciGal^ acoording tc i.orawari ,in i/jc light 
of the va^'i-M^y of wululloas of the- .restihetio pioblcii ;;ioIiia Uarxiat 


AUo-toi ^osiao.iL.i:iik.i (wii. firtib ccLLiittiar Ox/«3nliAht^'nrr.ent 

uiider jjeain] ia w^^.pcr:,eriCiag a ^^•cn?r.isLüncü .aisjv/ritings on irnalo, 
x^heiiix'e ciiid lit;orawa-.'o ^re r^ioauea, 'i'vjo üioao^^x'upi: c. .:%bout^ hiiri -.jore 
xiTiitten üj ;.i,iiolr:iu aiid A»A«.iOtjiiai2v# - — I^Ixofi ..ov i;^ in tho uourae 
Ol v/ii.ui:ici "lnoöai'a on Uiq hiot#cr^ cf Mrxxiüt uöbliie r.icG " cf iv.^iich 
tlio xirat volurn0(ap to tue "Line of }G.ara Zct/.in) r,lr«ad^' iwjr^i^sXQä. 
"Mll it üo aa 30urais60U3 na th^ book of A«A*Jiybec"i.i'jY o i jjun^oharaki, 
asks .iorav;£ikip /liich a-i^resaecl riunpoliara.ii^ a figh'i; for tha frcadoa of 
artiotio oreation anJ for a rn>ieoniLbl'3 pvfu^ Isadoro'iip v;hich vould 
not inutrfexe 4fi|)^i^ttera of ar^ ir. an admiuiotx\ioive \va;y? 

Loxa/^ßkl'. concludea in f^a^^lag: i^e^pite ius rAatiioaologic^liry mono- 


litUio appe?:ir£aicc soviel aefttaetloa i^ b pol^'^cne „iUii .mu^ oonfliot- 
iug prcbietu-. cnc ij^ostiofiß^^hr of cbc.nuoiiilut;^ onr* öc£^mrtic rer« 


Vr.Tty in raatf-era of art , of social£n as a creatiive rnethod nnä in 
thR defenoß cf f r^mtiliBm, iro^ernlsrr' rhö eb8tractionls:ii. fthis sjllabaa 
of errcro refKots ths crthodox otlniona io Hu^sia. George Lukaca ie 
eenerelly con ■.i,if.r«.))S^ revl^icaiLt. i.l,F(.) 

I.3-Tll3noT.o 'vrotp - ^ooü ^ ' o at empor ar^ aesthotios In it^a" 
\7^ioh lii insr, .,^^py..„5,,. :,.^ ..^.^, ^,^j.^ j.j^g ^^^^ ^^ YcgoroT bat si.rdlar 
in tendnno^.ahe iy^ not v,el l inicruicd; alae .peaks about "Preud'isi:. 
wxthoxil-, havlre^i: It :-cen3-?read hiuualf; ihc dcss not äiitinpuich 
bet-vor-n tbo Y=rlou^ eeiLcntiü tt.-.c,eucifcs eud does not cven mc-ntioa 
I.;Uchardo, Chi.ri.ea llcrris r.r.ü Charles otcvenscn.Her knov.-Iedg-. of 
"New Orlticisir." it sai:erfioi^l..h,' ücöb not kncv; the theses of l?snsom 
and dofis not m^'^utlon .7iiu,- fä.t t , 

.\ nöw bcok f'.mder Wie uul-uorship of Tuaalcv) "Cü contomporary 
bourgeoia fieH'.h.-blca" o,:rrles olaupters on tIeidcgsoi-,4.,.[alraux, Juag 
and thc fieor? of auti-i-ovcl, 

V'7fc.Et ]^7.r.3:l^. n.:oaa in Uic fiold of :;iar:ci5t aeat;!iotica,?a;;a 
Mormvaki v/orld bo its hiHori? in the ^ecra 1S17 -1936 (i.e. tl.o form- 
ative ,70c.i'B hofore l-.lup beo^ine oanonised and rigid.M.R.) An e>:ceuds^. 
antholog:^ of the writin,ju of ...nrx ,-.nd ng-.-'la on art ivas published bv 
ililch&i.l Lifshitü In g volamfM.-'ioruwski diiouiisoa the arrangöGeut cf 
thi3 materi^.! sud sjcsosta öOiuo l.iJrovüI^ieat^, Aaotiifr bcok in tiie 
Marxolcgio;il f.Uld ia G.^i'idlouder'ü "K.i.larx,F,.:{tt;5clg and tho cLuestion 
of" T-'i- -uil-.uor irivosti.„..j& .".(»'rat the gcneoia cf the pro- 
lem of aiatorloim and alif'na'ion i'roir. ]i,;.nt; to Schiller ^7nd ne£;el nnd 
the iduea ohoiit .-n "art of thr faturc" in Jtopian fcoirlism, ih^.a. the 
enti-Horn.9nttci8rr. of -arx,hi^ evereion to relit^icus sirt and the aocro-or- 
lotion of the theaes of "ioung C'enieDjf " bj üngels are disoaased. 
The Huestion of "part:/ apirit" ia taJkau uj in « freah v.'-^. 3ut oue 

to ^^arx and 3?ngol3 tlKi world view kUir^ttt^HrttetermineB tho artibtic value. 


The aathor also traufers thy idea of ♦•part,^ epirit" from the politio- 
ftl anali/aoö of -^arz aiid cngela ii?^lÄ uiQChanioalls iuto aosthetios^ He 
couciadoa \wi\iii lUo ßtatitJia^at uhau Louin» ;i ideafa of axt .vsrc a aontiixu- 
ation of thü;^« Ox i-^t^A^ui: ana iüig ia on thr; subject. 'Z\xh book is on a par 
v/ilh oht: anal:7seö of Llfaüitz ,-*^uk/o3, fJapliaelLefebvre and ITooh. 
Ilere Ivlorawaki haa a ioug uigroaslon cs to how the aQüjJeuios of Marx 
atid r^ngolö- the "oiaaaioe" of uarxisn- /;cu-ld have to be preBstitö?.* 

M.Koraiiöv di-oi-jaed ::p.rl Lieblineohfc» s post'iumously 
publlshed (1922) book " Stadien üb^r die -^swe^iiiigsgeaetza der gasell- 
schfiftlicheu lin'öiVickiung'' (^tud^ on wh^ lawa of övclation of aociety). 
Li'jbkneo'iii v;aa a auxjpoxt^r of uhc e-ripreaaioaibt tirjory of urt and 
rejecTJüd roa.liam ^ss± aB uoo irupart>ial and uürol^ rüfleol-ive for the 
sake v.f a re7 0luuionax;y tcndanoicxsnesa of the dr aina.Zorallov; opposes 
thosd iuöaß siiarpl^ but unjciGal^ acoording to i..o.ravv3ki ,iri i/ia llght 
of the Vö4:i:;a^ of solutioaa of thf* aesthetio problca viitliin 


Auatoi i-onaclaarski (th. firt^t coainisaar of /onllAht'inirient 

under lienini Xii o^:pcri.euGxiig a J^cur.istanco»ai£j\vritinga on unäio, 
■ohetix'e and iitieratajo aro röi^aiiscu 'i^jo moao^i,x'upi:'& abouv him vjore 

wxitten oy A^i^ol^iu and ii#A «J^o tjcjdiov# P.'jLxüfiuov io in tho uourae 

of v/riuing "£i£«aai^a on the hictcry of Marxiat aebtiieulcs ^' of '.'/«lich 
tliO firat volurae(-ap to the uine of FJ-ara Z^^tkin) lar^-^.^dj api^v^ared« 

'•111 it DG ao oourag'Gons aa th*^ book of A-A^L-ybeui^iV o i Lun^oharoki, 
aakB .iorav^aki, ^.'hic;h a-jreaaed ^iinAOharaki* a fight for tha frcadoa of 
artiötio o/eation and for a rnaeonVol-} pvTJv Isaderohip vihich Ä'ould 
not inoi^rfere kiff^i^ttecB of art in an ad^rlniotratiTe \va:;? 

iiioxa^v6ki concludcs in &ayiag: I>eepite its uiathodologioally mono, 
iithio appeart^iicc iaovlet aeßthetloa i^ b poly^cne with liiany confllot- 
iug probieui?. and ciueationa/ihf. procciis of abandoiiint^ one c!o£:mf»tic rer« 


^OT the Ec.i:e cf open scAentixio inrest-igation Jias beson. sone still 
holß tc the üld Btiff r-.-i-jB bu'o thc :ne.Jority doee not. Aftor ihe 
o?nonizr,tlon of cns th^cif? ^nd theory of bcaity ,3orlPt rsstb-tloo 1; 
hra hPooT.© «sstnrr f-'. /;lth trus ?r-:i?3t aririt." 

laa to tho resalt 'ehrt -fern is t.he fuuuameatfc,! proptrty. fThie 
is neithar borne ont, bj> ilor^^wski' . ov'u Präsentation nor bj tha 
fact8.i-.B.).3v':'n the at^DfiS£..>arit o£ i.bsti-aot ei"i lg changing ae fche 
aprreoir,tion of the i.irti..tio£.llj/ vüJ.^xabU elcnents In the ' crLs of 
vezjjnne, ^atla^t- entl Marrnist provps.ln thic. recpect thc hock of 
^.'Dlrunvi^Y.?.,ihe fa&aya üf V,:;aroin,fch'3 last Ertlclca of " 
GJI'Jdophyvit!>,oTO liapoi'taat then the e:ctronelj nGg-.tlve atP.tomeats 

"^^'^'^'^''liSJo^J''' ^".le-nUfio attitnöe of Sorict n^RthaticigPg doea 
not r.onnrnr^ ib,?.n'^.r-rvr.r.t of i;;eologiQal engagesient.'j'hs ideas of 
••national •apirit" p^na-part:; s-,:irit' aie e:nbodled in th.3 ae.'jthatio 
inve^ti.-ratioQs.^a. ' ■ ,.ol. .dSc;! ....ucs of iovi^it ao^thetioa 
ahou.u; be moro biöcd on'vlociaa jhau oa paadioa.i'ho ohange ia 
Jovic-t -eathetioa is als-.; duc to a doßp ohar-go of the arti^tlo praotioe 
in nuö8ia.A33t'intioö .•oul'\ liko to partioipato in it und not tf> r,Uy 
on the sidelinfis.nnt cvcrcuniiag of aoathatio dcgraotir-ni doponda cn 
f ar the r ija-iwA s.:h cf ar . l'üsalf, 

Alt^ough i07let ^adu'i.rbica diffora 3 oin.ilo 1 3l>; on th^s aorfaoe 
from ia&tara noethotica ,a aiO:iea' look oho^^'a uhat cho tu-uratioal 
worrioa ore ai.allax, Ihio la urna aboiii: tho ait-Bonsions on th» 
ob.1':ot of a'?v=>thytiös,f.bout the ohcraotor of coBtiict.ic (iu&lity 
'xnä the vior\ of -.rt, i' 1:. a figlit xr. dnfmfie of the rJLiaütio 
elen«nta In c.rt also ir. Arn«-rican aPcthPtlc6(Abcll,Crocnö, Gctahalk 
Munro , Poppor). Th^ i:robler.a cf sppliod rxt cre oocap.-plng the 
minda of noatsrn Sirope and i73A ; tna wcrks nbout Cynara and apeoiea 


cf art Kro a E^oarling poinf, In Ua/^^itfily nüd France. ( Few 

but In a oonpiGtely d 1 f fer^nt way 

j. [1 

to Ih o5r* ^ 

V Vxri 3o^^^M. ^^r^t ^^"^tl oc havü added to tiie 

1 T'^^c'M. 1 '-.prii_- 11 r;ryi.^,.-_ -^vo"blr}np cf '^s^iorn aea-blieuica ufäi^ oroblema 

■'s ^ •'■ s . 

■> . 

'.'-•^ ':»: -^ho .i^irxl^t bheor^;), -1.3 •) 

oq.u.aix^' and ooauLauüusii?, ^üarted fxoiii a oortain polni 
Ol Tiew ,int;ere£tc:ia laainly in the co^-^ibivr» anl ideoiogiöal ormbenta 
of üke work oi ari aad ite f^sneaia and it; ata.yoJ ^,hcro. ^ui^ point 
of View lifidtod ita fleld of iny^atigaUion and v;hilo it, aü&Qvcl 
greaw uridruplia Jsijd, in thi^ä resf.ootjit had to Icavo ot^lier (iaestions 
tio Ou.ior ii:i7öötiga'^orö#i^iarxiab aesthetloa shoald therafcre op^n OM 
a diaio^ue with aeatueüioa oatside its o\m iiiaiis. 

7 / /' 

namely the familiär, It is tlitthing Imo n on the coninon; sense level 
that become^the ob.lect of tlie poetic or valuationcl prooedure^ Other- 
v^ise the poetio -orli would be imintelligible. A given ooncrete story 
al'-ays f cllo- s a generallv familiär pattern of tliings. I^erybody is 
familiär with the sweetness of love , the oravings of anibition, the 
tortures of jealousy developeu. in the Shakespear^an drama. e ..:ust 
knov; the oonduct of parents and cf children , the rneaning of gratitude 
and the obl:irq.ui(ii^y oT ingratitude to iinderstand the rneaning of Iling 


Lear» But this is the general knov^edge of mankind,--oetical ImoFledge 
or the faotual icnov^ledge presupposed in the valuation:.-l structure is not 
novel in the sense of a novel scientific idea like that of infantile 
sexuality or of the bacillus of pneuraonia . ::he Statement thet water 


H>P is entirel^ novel to the oomnon man and its -'orth lies 

in the novelty of this faotual discovery» But any oivili^zed being <:^ 

4Wtft natural subject of valuations --111 grasp tlie rneaning of poetic 

discourse. 2ven a ohild v/ill understand a simple drama and be unable 

to gras-n a scientific demonstEEtion. '""hings >ov:ever that do/enter 

within the sphere of valuations are not ji» object'of ^rt. 

Natural soience always is at least in its 
intent a mental manipulation of the real while poetry aims at the r end- 
ering of the valuational idea of the real.It follO'S from this that 
the things "oresupposed in the ^--djrk and the conoomitaHt valuation have 

to be r endered unp actu ,simultaneousl;-.T]lieref ore poetry has to ter^^ 
a double purpose and the renü.cring oailnot be purely Photographie^ 

of valuation 

whether by picture or conceptual sign since ohe 
also re^iuires expression.We now see v/hy the asscrtion that the worth 
of the -ooetic utterance lies in its form is is re-lly 
a question of contents and function^ since all the devices oonceived 
as form taokle .fuß-t^^tixß valtetional ä»^±tj , 


519 WEST 121 STREET 
New YORK 27. AV, 

Raaaian Aeathetioa Today and Their Hlstorloal Baokground 

Although it is generali^ known that the LIarxist-Leninist theory of 
aeathetioa praotioed in Soviet Buaaia today ia oalled aooialist realiam, 

the latter is oonaidered in the West leaa an aesthetio theory than a 

poiitloal Slogan and the detaila of this theory aa of/aeathetio thought 

in general are largely unknovm. The theory itself gained general reoogni- 

tion aa the Soviet atate theory of aeathetioa in the Thirtiea /under the 

infiuenoe of the politioian Zhdanov v/ho aasnmed the role of a sort of 

oraole in aeathetioa^TTE should be reraemberefTNthat when the coramunist 

revolution broke out, Bussia waa part and parcel of the (a?tistic and 

aesthetio trenda in Europa »The paintexa Zandinalcy ,iiIalevioh were 

even among the ieadera of non-objective painting still proaoribed offi- 

oially In Russia -but not in Poland-today . 

In Western theoretical teriliis aa used for instanoe in contemporary 

Italy aooialist realiam oould be desoribed aa a poetio rather than an 

aeathetio theory. It ia a norm or a proposal aa to how to oreate a so- 

oially and aeathetioally aoeeptable art eapeoially in literature and 

plastio art^but even in musio and arohiteoture although the theory oan- 

not be any reliable guide in the se^jffielda .This theory haa a oertain 

cJ ^ I 

epiotemologioal andrere apeoifio^eathetio baaelthe former is derived 

from V.I.Lenin* s "Materialism and jämpiriocritioiam (v/hich(^appeared in 

19C8).The latter is Hegelian in origin namely aa filtered through the 

mind of i^riedrioh Kngela. Lenin attaoked the empiriocriticts such aa 

llaoh and Avenariua aa oryptoidealiita and maintained that thought 

v/aa a true refleotion of the material v/orlä gradually improved by aoience. 

Sooialist realiam extenda this theory to art and oonsidera it aa a 

basioally oognitive phenomenon,another kind of v/orld Cognition along- 

side aoienoe» Bat v/hile soienoe prooeeda by diboovery of natural lav/a 

1«6« in an abstraot v/ay , /prooeeda by creating oonorete generalizationa 

i.e. artiötic typsa ,i^elv t^^pes/hainan beinga.homan situations 

the aesthetio 

eto, The artistio tj/pe is 

che natural law in the scieaoea,it is therefore 
a oognitive phenomenon .Ihe artistio generalization is of course of 
sensuoua nature.'Ihis theory of the artistio type is a Hegelian 
üeritage. Engels applied it in discusaing per.onages in oontemporary 

Sooialist realism had its predecessor in the bourgeois period 
in the fern of "critioal realism" aa the Marsista ^/it and the 
latter had a distingaished past in Hussia/developed in the critioal 
theoriea arou d the middle of the 19th Century by the sooalled 
revolutionary demoorats -who were no i-Iarxista of course-but offered 
a realistio or materialiatic aesthetica opposed to that of the 
Hegeliana then dominant in the Russian univsraitiea. SmutrE l'he 
writera v/ho worked out a theory of non-l.Iarxiat realism were espeoially 
the critioa Belinski, Dobrolubov and Ohernyshevak . Already Belinski 
stated that the death of tha Bomantio poet Pushkin opened a new 
era in Russian literature v/ith the novelist Gogol, the epoch of 
realism. Hioolai Chernyahevski ,the aon of an orthodox priest 
stadied at the univarsity of dt.Petersburg,publi3hed a dlssartation 
(Llay 3,1855) "The aeathetio ralationa of art to reality" oomple^at- 
ed later on by a review of his ovm 3tady,a sort of auto-critique. 
As a supporter of the materialistio philosophy of Ludwig Peuerbaoh 
Chernyahevski tried to refute Hegel and his pupil P.Th.Viacher- 
then preaminent in Eusaian u-Mveraitiea- and to become hi^naelf 
a ^^euerbaoh in aeathetica, 

Chernyahevski rejects in his worka tha Hegelian asauiaption 
that art is aeathetioally auperior to nature.'ihis is^S^ajnjmption 
of scholara ,not of the common people who would maintain the xma 
opposite to wit that srixa life and natura were | auperior to art. 


AH objeot that remlnda ua of or «xprsassa ins ^ 
' oo-icpta Of >=oaut3 var5 aooording to the aooial olaaa to whloh <m. 
b.lousa.paaaan.3 have othoi aaatUeUo oonoepta than aophl3ti=at,d 
mtellaotuals.tte «orl.a of art ao not coapare with r.allt, and art 
ahares thia oondltlon wlth sclenc. whloh la not anperlor to reallW 
.lth«.Art 13 not a oopj.a mer. l^tatlon of raallt,,.ut Ita reproduc- 
tlon t.e. a randering b, artlstlo maana.Shls oorraaponda aooordlng to 
Oharnjaheral.1 to tha Arlatotallan ndmaala .Tbl. reproduotlon la tbe 
randarlns of tta »aln tralts of roaXlt, .not Ita nataraUstlo r.pUoa. 
But art should not onl, reproduoa but alao a.plaln and judge tba 
World. Obarn,abe,aM beoana tbe oblef tbooratlolan of orltloal raall^ 
aa praotioad In tba raall.tlo .oaalan novala of tbe 19tb oentur, 
„blob Implied a orltlolso of Busalan aoolet,.In tbl. sanaa be U tb, 
praouraor *» of tba soolallat raalla. of toda, wblob ratalns ^n, 
Of the featur.s of bla tbaorj.Äan Sngala baoama fa-lllar »Itb bla 
.rltln.a,ba oo«arad hl. wltb ^darot »nd^eaalng .Uaxx bl^eXf waa^ 
a. ad^lrar of Obarn,abava.l .alnX, for ^(orltlola^ of tba aoono^oa 
^ «hn ^art Ulli. Iha Eungarlan -ar.iat .eorg i«^o= thlnj^a tbat 
.„latol.a theorj of art darlvaa to an a.tant fro. Cbern,oba,a.i . 

Sbe lattar oountarad tba Idoallatlo dlaparagan-ant of tba baautj 
of uature with the comxterolaim that art is merely 

w .. th« latter is miattainable. He rejeoted the usual divi- 
nature where the latter is uu» 

alon Of tb. aaatbatlo oatagorla. Into tba baautlfnl.tba aubll^ and 
.„ ooMoal and »alntalnad that tbeaa ar, tbra. oata.orlaa aoong 
^«. Ha ra„otad tb. Id.allatlo t.aor, of tba aubll». aa oon.t tntad 

„ü. rajaots tb. Id.allstlo d.flultlon of baaut, aa an 
„.IXlbrl^ ba.»..n Id.a and l^g. and of tba aubllB. a. an o,ar. 
„.l»t Of tb. ld.a tb. l-ga.^^o ^«-'»'"^ '= =^"^^' "" " 
«b. subU . 30»tblng »nah gr.atar tban tba tblnga olcsa and fa^Uar 
to^a. Ihaa, ar, t.o dlatlnot conoapta not aubordlnata to aaob otb.r. 

Ee rejects the ooncept of the tragioal of Th.P.Vischer,refutes the 
idea of tragio neoeaaity and denies the basio role of necesaity v/ithin 
the ooncept of the tragioal. The tragioal is the terrible In human life. 
In his novel"What is to be done?" Chernyahevaki tried to show that 
what aooording to ourrent ideology leada to tragio involvement oould 
be solved humanely by reaaonable egoiam, i'hus he is rather a utilita- 
rian in ethioa and replaoea the idealiatio ayatem of Hegelian aeathetios 
by a realiatio and materialistio one* Hia viewa and literary activi- 
tiea led to hia peraeoution and imprisonement.He spent half his life 
in prison and in Sibarian exile. 

Tj)e Views of the revolutionary demoorata auch as Ghernyaheraki 
are atill an objeot of historioal atudy in Buajiia and ao are the viewa 

of the ^^mmmt thinkers of the olaaaioal period in ßermany (Kant, Leasing, 
dohiller, Herder )while the more reCent Weatern aeathetios are lesa known. 
Mikhail Llftohitz republiahed hia oolleotion •*Zarl Marx and Friedrich 
Bngels about art" in a more comprehenaive edition(1957) while another 
oolleotion daala with ''lenin about culture and art" (1956 )♦ 

In 1956 The Institute «fed- Theory and History of Art of the 
Aoademy of Pine Arta of 03SB in l^loscow publiahed a textbookk of the 
aeathetio theory in the Soviet Union entitled "Essays of Marxist- 
Leninist Aeathetios** whioh was publiahed in^lJ960^^n a aecond augmented 
edition« Its editor ia Z.A«3itnik and a mxtCpart of its chapters 

are written by N«A«Dmitrieva* Aooording to thia text aeathetios is 
»*the soienoe of the law« of the artiatio assimilation of the surround- 
ing World by man ; about the nature,the laws of development and the 
sooial-tranaformational role of art" (p«5) Aeathetioa differa from the 
history of art whioh givea an aocount of facta not of laws and from 
oriticism whioh judgea partioular works of art^Purthermoro "ilarxiam- 
Leniniam haa shown the historioal oharaoter of the artiatio points of 

'' tu'JX''::''^-^-^^^ ^^^-'^^^ ^^ 


.view.ideaa and aeathetio revealed dda* the contenta 
or art aa a proceaa of Cognition of/realitj and aa a proceaa of the 
eatablishment and of the development of realiam in a struggle with 

;sfz^ ^^-^^ 



ihia ahowa a different ooncapt of the history of art than 


the one oarrent elawhere .The streaa fer^not on a aucceaaion of different 



I form of art bat rather -w»**rSroSHtent 
masm ttal itameänln^^ r^-^^ 

th£s' aenae" it ia 

also aaserted that the differenoea of style aa defined by Western art 
historiana are inaignifioant oompared with the individual differenoea 

existing between the great mastera. 


bfart^Iloni'^i/ftf f ^f ^°^:'^^^^' aaidf7SV6)''is not exhausted 
^i.? L ^»^^"^ ^^^ law8.Aesthetioa atadioa all lawa of the 

tuc'ef iS ?tf ?ni%';r r '^f ^'°'^^ ^^ ^^ whiS'ca^'ot be rl- 
Jh^ i„ ?;,^^^ totality to art. ihe aeathetic attitude toward 
th«n»orld manifeata itself in every creative labor and will 
beoome more apparent aa labor will ceaae to be merel? a meana 
Of preservation of life al^i transform itself to b?come enjS?! 
ment aa a prime neceaaity of life.^iievertheleas "the aeatStlo 
St'L'f «^«M^f^f '^'4^" °^ • "^^ "« ^lly ?ealized in ar"! 

worli aM fn irr«^i°«^«°K/'^'°*^°5 '°^ *^« Cognition of tS 
worxa ana an irreplaceable meana of education of men of tha 

Js"t ke? \l Jh'"' .°^^^f°*" -^^^ ^^'^^y ^^ the faSr^?^art 
o L% ^ ° u^® underatanding of the aeathetic lawa in 
a most comprehensive senae." 

Ais definition of art ia a Paraphrase of Lenin» s theory 
of reflection ,it is not speoified in what theae alleged aeathetic 
lawa consiat.^ut it is aaid that in studying those lawa aeathetica 

atudies art from the 

point of View of the special statua of 

ita objecta.ita raethoda, and aima. Bvery hiatiDrical epoch dealt with 
theae problema and orlted the dominant syatem of aeathetio conceptiona 
but art itaelf dereloped in accordance with the aeathetic ideaa of 
aociety which provided it with ita methoda.alma and objecta. rhua arose 
a oroaa-fertilization between art and aesthetic points of view both 
of which depended oltimately on the same m terial conditiona of life 
of Society, 

One of the most important oharaoteristics of art,th0 Statement oon- 
tlnuesjis the partioipation^of the toiling masaea.The origin of art 
from the reality of labor ,it3 link v/ith the work and the oreations 
of the people is an indubitable historioal fact.^hile the ruling clasaes 
alv/ays aimed at making out of art an obedient ideological v/eapon and 
to aubjeot it to their aesthetio intsreats ,the folk tendenoies in art 
managed to survive ,were the endaring xhhk«h f ountain-head of artistio 
creativity and left their stamp/on the v/orka ordered by the raling 
olaaa» 2he aesthetio theoriea themaelves v/ere of courae an expreaaion 
of the points of view of the ruling olasaea.But at every^tept of ita 
development art v^aa rioher than theae theoriea. i'hus we do not find 
in the 17th centurs? anj^thing theoretical adequate to such artistio 
achievements aa the dramaa of Shakespeare, the paintings of Hembrandt 
and Yelazcj.uez» The folksy spirit of those artists v/ent far bej^ond 
the frame of dominant aesthetio theories.Heither the aesthetioians of 
the Baroque period not those of olaasioiam v/ere able to create an 
aesthetio baaed on the higheat aohievementa of the art of the 17th 
Century »The aeathetic ideaa implioit in the worka of the great masters 
did not find anjfc adeq.uate oritical expreaaion and generalization« 
It oannot be aaid therefore that great artistio worka are based on 
the dominant aesthetio theoriea of their time.The dominanoe of church 
Boholasticiam in medieval aeathetics does not give us the right to 
oonsider medieval art aa an expreaaion of this scholaaticiam. The 
authora of medieval aesthetioa v/ere aa a rule theologiana but the 
theologiana did not oreate art« 

The rift betv/ean doninant aesthetio theoriea and the ourrent 
praotioe of art ia oharaoteriatic of a divided aociety where the 
oreative foroea of the people are enalaved.But there are exoeptiona 
v/hen v/ithin the claah of two culturea taking plaoe inside that divided 

sooiety in the epoch of oapltalism the authora of progressive aesthetio 

ideas eapouse the/point of view ÄtxJdaaDcjtEHjäfc«: on art aa i nr^yiBistr^ tgw^m did 

the Busaian ddmooratic aeathetioa in the 19th Century. The latter not 

onlj? generalized Busaian realistio art but asaigned to it new aima. 

where there are no exploiting olass e a 
In a sooialistic sooiety/ there is no reaaon fifc^ suoh a divergenoe 

since aeathetioa and art are there equallj? of the people« 

Art is linked with the economic factor allthoueh it i4 difficult 

to T3^avel the preoisea5l)nnection.But to abandon it v;ould mean to 

give rein to phantastic interpretationa . VJhen the theoreticians of the 

bli nde dbv the autonoioy of artlstio manifeatationa 
past/triea to establish the lav;s of artistlo activit^^ v/ithout iegard to 

ooncrete social -economic conditiona they atufcled will/y-nilly into 

being the ideological ap^kesmen of the riaing claaaes» The inequality 

of classes within the exploitatory aociety v/aa accompanied in the 

aeathetio field by the idea that art is an activity for the select . 

There waa the conoept of the xzt spiritual aristoicracy of art and 

of all aeathetic experienoea» But such conceptiona contravened the 

historical truth that the people waa the originator and inspirer of 

original art and that its oreativity waa the aource of all profeasional 

artistio activity^neither the aeathetioa of the alave-holding nor 

those of the feudal or rbhe bourgeoia olaaa were able to acknowledge that. 

This doea not mean that the aeathetioa of the paat do not contain 

any element of objective truth of a true Cognition of the worl^Ts^^^ 

heritage /ahould be taken over by the auoceeding olaaaea^ if it is 
based on a .Cognition of true/;reality,;and a reflection of it . (7^/^ kdhj2cfeA<^^r>fH- 

l Art iDelonga here and the preservation of ita traditions also 
dependa on the partioipation of populär maaaea in it. Theo»etioal 
aeathetioa contain fewer aeminal elementa than art itaelf but thera 
are auoh elementa in the materialistio tendenciea of the aeathetioa 
of the paat* 


"As in Philosoph^ the main problem is the dlohotomy between materialism 

and idealiam , the queation of the relationship of art and reality 
is the ■ ■ tw^p g «^! « «» essential problem of aesthetica.It is on the 
settlement of this queation that the idealistic or materialiatio 
oharaoter of an aeathetio theory depends." (p«9) , ^ 

The history of aeathetic8,it is said fnrthermore , \»t. »ea ^ he develop- 
ment of materialistio aesthetics in the atruggle with idealistic onea. 
But deapite the existenoe of valuable elementa in the former there 
exiated before the f oundation of Marxiam no aeathetioa aa a oonaiatent- 
ly materialistio aoienoa "atudying the objective laws of the artistio 
refleotiou of tiie world." The narrowneas of the pre-Marxist ,even 
materialistio aeathetioa"" ia evident lu the deaUnga wlth the prooeas 
of tranaformation of the data of reality in the artistio thought, 
in the inauffioient atreaa on the aotive oharaoter of the artiatio 
aaairrllation of reality by man,in the 3±s±kBt laok of nnderatanding of the 
( of pr aotioa in the Cognition of reality by artiatio means, in the 
undereatimation of the aotive role of progreaaive ideaa." The 
philosophera of the paat did not riae to the profound conoeption of art 
aa a form of aooial Cognition determined by the aooial exiatence* 

The olasaioa of i^-arxiam^Tave -in achieving the great 
revolution in philo sophy -not only diaoovered the lawa of the evolution 
of aociety but formtaated the lawa of Cognition and of the tranaforma- 
tion of the world by man .In doing so they laid the acientific founda- 
tiona for the underatanding of such an important field of aooial 
Cognition aa ia art and of auch an eaaential branch of aooial knowledge 

88 is aeathetioa* 

Marxist oonoeptiona on art were popularized eapecially 
by G.V.Plel5:hanov(1856-1918), Pranz Mehring (1846-1919) ,Paul Laf^rgue 
(1842-1911) and othera* But the worka of nenin signified a higher level 
in the development of I^arxiat aeathetioa. Lenin« a theory of reflection 

4a thö theoretioal basia of the realistic method in art. Hia teachings 

^ffWFOr a 


a 9 

degree of the underatanding of the olaaa oharacter and of the 
ideologioal natura (ideynoat» ) of oreativity J ^tar theh deteotibas js^ Its 
ÄOtive rola in the life of aooiety and ## its bonda with the atruggle 

of the people for freedom« Lenin» s teaohinga about the exiatenoe of 

two oulturea within every national oultnre in the epooh of oapitaliam 

-namely aocialistio and demooratio elements v/ithin the dominant reaot- 

ionary one- gave ua preoiae oriteria lÄröüa» evaluation and lad to 

the aettlement of the ctueation of the utilization of the artiotio 

heritage by the Proletariat. Stress on the populär charaoterfJlarodnoatM 

of art lad to a oultural revolution ©nd the flov/ering of aocialist 
art in USSR* - The statement termin-tes "The worka of Lenin, the meas- 
ares of the Central Goimnittee of the Coinmuaist Party and of the Soviet 
gtvernment about ideologioal probloms are the theoretical foundation 
of aooialiat aeathetioa*'^ 

It follov/a from this statement that the three pillara 
of aocialist realism xzb i.e. the recLuirements demanded of the artist 
are "party apirit'% ideologioal Äh^mur and populär (f olksy j oharacter 

W\%/ US o^f/ncu^Sf D^r 

of iF*i^produota.2he latter oharacter reminda^of^the "blood and s6il" üU^^H 


x^azia jhowever '^narodnost" (folksineaa) 


j . 

has soolsüL while "blood and soll" ha^ racial oonnotations, 

"Bealiam'* ia conaidered in this atatement not aa a atyle 

but aa a "method" of artistio oreation.üriginally is*(wSa a "style" 

exjplified for inatanoe by auoh writera aa uaxim Gorki. But such a con- 

oept left unanswered the question of the value of the art of the paat. 

The answer waa provided by 7.]}neprov in his book "Probleme of Healism" 

(Leningrad) published bCS^F?« in Ruaaian Journale in 1957-59. In 

conoeiving realism aa a methöd not aa a style Dneprov rendered possible 

the incluoion v/ithin realism of many different atylea existing in 

|,| oontempor^ry 

the paat •jfyfalao afforded the/artist a greater freedom in the 

seleotion of subject matter and of the meana of artiötio reflection 

nalitj of t.e wor^ of art. '-^HU ooatradiotad the Idea of dC6Wtl|.W 
that prsached th. unltj of soolallatlo stjl« -.tos le.ell.g all 
artutlc orgl^alit, - aud^Tf th, revlslonls.s »ho »ould ops. tho 
.ooLllst CmyFes not om to dlffere^t st,l.= »-» " "^""''* 
.ethods of orea.lon. I.n,prov, da,l=a foand l^tators also outs.d. 

Soviet Russia* 

But the faot ren^ius that the sause of "realis." is in oonstant 

fX^ .T.e Buasian Aoade^ of 3oie.ces oonvo.ea even in 1957 a special 

;, .^«fl to "•2he Problems of Kealism" whose prooeedinga 
oonferenoe devoted to ±ne rruui« 

„,r. putlishod »5 LBla^org. Duopror-a oonoeptions waterj lov» 
t.e «anins of .ha te.» "realia.- a^»e sa. the wor. of suoh 
«idol, divergent fl««rea as Vela.,!^- a oonrt palnt« , and of 
Eo^trandt- s ..iddle olass palnter «ith|etaph,3ic^ InoUnationa- 
are e»brao.d aa Instanoes of »asters(^eaa^hl./?^allstio palntlng. 
..0. suoh an angle the hlstorv of Stiles and the at,les thenael.aa 

.eooue of seoondar, iupo.tanoe ainoe the, ma, he all e»hraoed ., 
reallsm|n_JaotPS5rSiJ^'«"l» 1"^='"' °* "^"'°'- 

tt Li^tJi 



Leu ±^ sranted that thia realistio theor^ of art provides 
a dJmension for t.e evaluation of t.e social role and the social 
J^n _i ,. Li l .i1i 1-- of art ,it does not solve the perennial aesthetio 

problema although it maj add nev; onss. 

.The äoviet aeatheticiana 

are plagued for instanoe .. the .uestion of the,essence of the 
.esthetioa/ whioh is the old prohle. of heaut.. .hus ^.Burov pu.lished 
.. ..5e a .00. ".he aesthetio es.ence of art"_ and stated that nhe 
.esthetical hegins there where ^n e^pressea the thinga cognized *^ 

o'ojeoÄhen he learns how to expresa 

the fuimess and richness of his human 

and graapa hinseif in 

^Hi M r^iii li >Trlltrr"l*"~** ^^® fuimess ana nuuiiooo v/^ — ^ ^ 


Burov haa a relativistio and sutjectiviatio conoept of beauty. As 
against him V.Vanslov who pablished the booka "Contenta and 
form in art" mo30ow)1956) and "The Problem of Beaaty« fllosoow 1957) 
and L.StoloTioh ,author of a bock "The Aesthetical in Realits^ and Art" 

^^^°?bjroU?r *^°^* ^ """^ objeotiviatic point of yiew/ihey asaert 
the/exlatenoe of "aeathetic qualitiea" generated bj, the faot that 
the objeota of the material world are'so Immeraed in the aocio-praotic- 
al aottTity of man that their form aaaumea social meaning and beoomea 
thereby ae^thetically relevant. This thaor, ia direc'teTÜl^i'S/'furS^ 

"""llS^^Mirr' '^''<^-^^^'^S objeotivist .namel, ..A, Itaitrieva 

the(aut¥of?ra of a ooasiderable part of the textbook ("Ocherki^i '^^"^''*-' 

in this paper. Sfte im/ along with othera «fcdkiÄxftüaüöix that beauty 

exista in^endently of man,of sooiwty and of the praotiaal activity 
of man .^^ording to the philosopher L.Zogan of äverdlov to confer 

'^aeathetio <iualitiea" on the world of reality ia mystioiam. 

Thus we have here behind\he aoreen of aooialist realism a whole 
oo aohed in Marxist idiom » um » waexe 

famut^of oonüradictory opinlona/ -A .Burov dealt equally with tSe/^^BSS^'^* 
*"***" of artia±tjitio Cognition: Is it man alone.humanized nature 

or the whole/reality? This lad to a distinotion between "objecta of^ 

01.4- " „v,;i n^^^i.^ i. ^ ^n . . differentlated ■:ot^6v^'e#->^^o^m' 

art and "contenta of art" which were not iiaddaigs±Mksk/Vif^e ^ 

question * 

I.Vinogradov elaboratad this/in hia book "The Problems of contenta 

and form of literary oreation" (llosoow 1959) based on an analysia 
of the novela of 'iiurgeniev. 

The Problem of two aesthetio categories namely the tragioal 

and the comical i»«»e/alao discussed >fr.»ximjü miLi u._. -^^^ natura 
Of Vm tragioal waa -as ia knowr>.already (W af i mÜ^tK y Marx himaelf 
and^erdinand i^assalle when the latter wrote the drama "Franz von 
Sickingen". Today the diffioultiea of thia problem within the frame- 

"""tß^^^^^^^ ^°°^«*y «*«" ^'om the fact that aocialist society 
has^raSXass oonfiicts.How can it have tragio involvementa'^It ia 


Sr^EHTTragloal and the oomloal are oharaoterlatioa of 
human li^ wMoh art refleota. j.Boriev and L.Stolovich dealt with 
the proMe. of the oanioal wMle j.Borie. is espeolally Interested 
in the Problem of the tragical. 

The aesthetioian V.A.Ba.umnj^i gave afa outline of Soviet 
aesthetios in an artiole "Art and Aeathetic Education " flakustvo 
i eateticheskose vospitanye) in the Journal "Kommunist" ^0.3,1957) : 

''ii-3^t%\"fL'rs,nisT?h:ir^ r^ia^or^^L" """ T '''^"-'^'^ --^^ 

ly transforms and generalizea ?hf ;oiS! ^V^}^^ ^'^^'^^ oreative- 

theirmeaning and^reveSinrthe%fLr1l°beiinl ?L°'"^'f^\^S 
Artiatio generalization ia differfnt in Y.rfJJ4 n ^S Partioalar. .. 
oopy of life and a meanin^lp^« <^?^^-4 P^ii^ciple from a mere 
true Kxttxitx rXrt?on ff ?9ai?t^Ji°^°^ ^^^ forma... i'he 
turna art'to what it la « Itfil^^ ^" sensuoua artistio imagea 
Of the phenJmeS Of iiie'o? itl^L^'^'f}^''^''^ ^^« knowled^f 
laws...In genertlifing ttle floL «? i^?f»^^? tendencies.ita ^ 
imagea of it the artift il itt l Sf i^ ^® ' ^° drawing pithy 
a human being with definitesvmmth ?««''' ^I"""" ^^* ^ oreator. 

visualizea tfe sense anTtLTInJng'of J^fe^^'I^^^r/" ./ 
*f ideala ia a oold oopv of lif« «nf ^ \t a "U^ ^'* devoid 

what i£i most important i-hf^f^ .^°'' °£ ^^^"^^s and to grasp 

Art is a social ?acrL the S""! ll ''^^ e^istenof on^arth... 
conorete social forcea ^« ^»^^^?^.^^ ® representative of 
Standing above socIety '^bove^aLe« \^ i^-ii^^frent apeotator 
content Of his werk mu t m^r> S! ?! 'f^^T^ Parties... the 
his oontenporlries. When^olvw ^^^^''f -"^^ searchings of 
creation and embodyinp his ^aSf.?.^' indzvidual Problems of 
artist is conscioullv or !ncon^olo,!^T! It^^^ °^ t>eauty,the 
preter of the t^olitical nwar^n.^h-? *he aesthetical inter- 
certain social forces.!?! PhHosophical Ideals of 

politica nor m imaffiotin'^^fiMf^ is not an appendage to 
aophical ideala!lt^r:iwL a i ro"^?'' °^ ^^^^°^1 °^ Philo- 
its new aapects by the ar?i t 1^11^^^°"^.°^ '^^^ "«'Ki and of 
dividual View of reality x'haa'dJoi ovh.^ -''" '^^'"P °^ his in- 
Pedin oonfirm by their worka J^°l°Jhov,i.eonov,Padeyev and 

faithful to the LadItLL o?r^lisr'''''f'^^'---/'^^ ^^^ists 
in the fate of their people art? t^ fh'^^I^f^^^^^'^^y interested 
.tio ideala ireltTw^^^v^^J^^'^L.^^^^?^ Progressive 

thäreby un^bU to le^ch thelcne of p•re:J^^J'^^•"^^y "« 
aocialist realism does not p?evln? the «Jm^?^?*^ generalizations. 
new unexplored ground Ita ™il r« r artist fron searohing 
a true presentatlonfulelhe ^hi^pr^^J remaina.howeverf 
that the kJODtttfö truly bJautifS Snn^°£ ^^' P^^* ^^^Sht ua 
component. The beautiS ira^^^y^SiorS%\^^.J,\\°^^ ?L\SJfi. 


ful purifiea and elevatea man ,it effeota ^.^"^^nf ÄraLndtng^^ 
nobla in the hmaan soul and Helpa ua to get a true underatanding 
of the meaning and of the value of life«..' 

It is vers intereatiug that the Llarxist-Lenlniat writer has 

a t hinkar denounoed fo r IdeaUam 
to draw on the wiadom of taxii/vihen affirming that the oeautiful 

is a aymbol of the moral» 

In a pureis desoriptive vein it ia posaible to atate that 

Marxist-Leninist aeathetios are an aeathetio of oontenta as against 
the Weatern iSuropean aeathetios whioh are mainl? an aeathetio of 

Max Bieaer 

Icscow Stata Univcreiity dedlcated to M.V.Lomono3or 
Department of rhilopiophy 
halr of iüsthetica 

S ^f' 

.X 3hlt wri 
^M?lg,^^ th^ a ^sthötlcal co nceota of ThmnAM iiumt> 

t'^^^'^S^'l: ^^\^_f^«^^'^atior, for t^ie acquireLient of the acederdc der^-ree of 
a cunaidate oi philoaophical ©clences 

Tutor Dr. of ph^loaophy Prof. M.P. Cvsiarultev 
^.,.^:!^klic< ition8 of r bscov r TJnlv^iraity 
•n the contoaporery wrld-'' etatee the ProP^r-m of tho CoKniunlst Party of the Sovlet 
nion (p.51, Jtate rublioalions.^acow I96I) Jk ps^aionate atrarrgle i, b«lnr earrlod 
n of iwD ideolARie»- of the comnuntsUo «nd honr-x>ie ones." Th» TjouTEaoiBle havii^ 
.0 posaibllity of aliovdnp ite "superlorltr by force, tri.« to undorudn^ the aociaUrt 

anp by moans of Ideologlcal acta of sabotf'i'e (dlvaraions). Tt Is invoraible to aot 

A^ . Am fTlcan 

gaUist conrainlam mereTjr by war or ecorordcal mea.«,thc /ap,lopl«t8 of iiiv^erl-Haa 

■fflt», it ±3 ifetha- ideolÄgy that Is Inllspmaable ard aoafc Iwroptant. For the streng- 

•hening of th«dr i'eolofioal poaition the raactlonary drei 56 of 'JSA use the «»st varted 

»ntlcal and econondcal conceptlx>n8,phllo^ophio:^l, et:,ical and aeathstical blieoriae. 

'The stnirido for the rdiids and hetrta of menf assume« an evor -nore ob:!a«ite chamcter 

ind an Iwportant place in thla stnirrlo beloneB to art and aestiietics, 

ilie author of the dissertntion havlrv "!▼<« «b an Iritrodi-ction a 

Short revl^ ol* the oontaaporary ntance of .ie«thf*lc3 :1n tti*» nSa trlea to siuw iftat tbe 

▼apiouB Bciiools and trewto In whlch the contenporaiy aeethetic thlaklng axprertse» Its^lf 

in fmteLoH are in rwlity unlfied by one aim - the def arc« of the decadont capitpH-rtl e 

ord«r althoußh an the oitalde thiB aim ia oorered np by by pu-aly artittic" conaidera- 

tion »eaniiigly far ratnored from politics, T' en the autbnr p'.saea to the ana3ysi« of 

natnralistic trand In aeethafcics pomlar in America nihoM notible repraeentative 

US proBently the knovm AiuerLcan eeholar ,the editop pf "Tae .Journal of Aenttietlco 

id ivpt Criticlam" IhotkT« liutwo .Mtoro ia con^id«^xl an «•iL nont fljrare in Am««ic n 

aesthetlos after ^«hn Dewey. To hie influ. nre niil of ds i 1«m and Intcatiatioml 

hority teetifiee the fhct tliat he occupice th.> vo sillon of tho proüidont of th« 
•ican Socioby for AcathetioB | tltat he was electedaiai to the iaäi>erz}iip 

al Art SodAy in aiRland, thafc h« vas honor«* by thes appolntm^ &a a 
er of the Lefdon of ilonor Iti iVanc© gto, 

. construct. Ids aesthetlcal Lhoory oc tl.e pillcopaical foumfetlon of pogltl- 
. In Btartinj. at the beßianiflg of his croaiive activltiai from the poaltion of po3ltlvl«n,Itann) also a<ioptorl llbamLlan >*ilc!i i«8 a ehamctnrlstlc of po- 
m of thl5 perifld. ^t in the oourae of forty years od sclviitific activity in 
eM of aesfchetlt» the poaition of !^i,i«> undapv.e«t «ignüloant cbang«. If one 
• his w>x^B in chronologioai ordap one ir, able tr. ebsenre hov the HbaraLLsm of 
iasBical positlvlm ,the abstmct lutmnia Tuor« a„d t»re reo«!, brfor« a Mlitenfc 
y towaPds the etates of the acciaHst can,, ,th«l,^ art aar! ideolo-r, how «r«. more 
n becone «le attack» on the art of aociallst rcaliam. 

Tho Ässartatlon coiisists of tiir^e cUpt^«. 1.) Tho mene« of tt»e method 
Thoma» iiznro. 2.)Wie probleos of arfcistic oducation in !^m^. 3.) •n.e eocial meaning 
the aesthetios of Ilinro» 

In the firat ctjajpter ^ give an ««cpo^^ of tha esseitial pri.nciixLeei of 
f the naturaustie aeathetlc »ddah !uit.'o considsrs as tv.e nost vital end the mat 
.ppwprlate to the spirit of out er^d). He reeiar'a a» ita advanta^e the f^ct thut it 
contains the boot f«ifcur« ( of oouwie the "b rt" fron the pcint of vior of 
bourgeois scionce ) of all acistin- aesth-^tloal ooneent5.on8. AcconJlrc to ''uni-o it availa 
its«af of the mtedaUaia of ancient r-resco, of the ham.n5.nri of the Retwignance, of th. 
posittTlsm of Cowte, of the e«)lutioni«n of Spencer, of the n»t =rfÄltstic detenainia« of 
Maix and cf tha aslötönbiallom of 3artre, 

»inn> thiricB that having eynthefcized Tarious er ncet^ions he h-8 oo ipso 

llber ated aesthotio» fnjra "nanx>w clia.jri-d anfand Mind letilotisBf . Acoordinc to hin 

an eqnal 
all tronds in arta and aerthotics ha-»e «/il-^t of eKist^nce and only tt.s futui^ can 

Show idiich of thai are noat borteiiclal to "infcoILoctuHl irtd artiatic devÄopaent." 

Bierefore »aays :%uim, "there is no b<'.sin for q-wuTela »dth the varlous bmn'!« of myati- 

ol«i,BuperoatmHli«a and innftnent pantliejam if th^ do not obstruct the way to all 

othepapproachetf-.C-Towarda scienc-. in a'5ath«tJcB",IT.Y.1956,p.]12) . As a si^/nifleant 

trait of the restem a-ituralia» of üanro ia considercd ita «aynbi.etician» antf-tolemncrf« 

"^'•«irdB numorous ti^eorlea Th*« ^ <i 

f^iaiiainta- «tcnds also to relirHr^« ^^ >^ 

" a» wall a, «,« ^^i« w^ - are a cr«t.-«n «fr- • '^^^^«» 

ther«fo.enatumlic*ic,e„«,.tlcs i» fuDy conmtlbl ^.. 

H« ,„,^ , '^ compatibl«, wlth ralirleu3 bcaiafs. 

He «*«1,^ „«kee the at.t«apt to reject «ic«e «fc^,. f 
that all ,,. " '"'^^ "^^ " ^'"^^'^ »-^^^- t^'i'^'^ 

t^t axx nre .. ... ., «... ^,,^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^^^ 2 

arts FPogreaB? "Iha Jornml of A«.«.««.« locc" ,. • 

or .vesU;etlc8,l055^ n3A,r3b,3,l,179) 

these of IJun«. 1. hidd«, the tte, d„lro to bcUttla t.. •«,.etlcalama^.o8i„ae.t»>etlc.andl.theth.o^,,^ 

«^^ . . «»"oxy Ol art and in th© fliÄl 

account cie^luato theLr Idaolo.ical content. 

# 2 Is d«et«l to tti« cmiciam of th« concm,t «f .^ * ^ 

® concept of art o.f ThooBs Täinro. 
Slnce tfte ti:r.e tho tanr. "arV- baota« to siirnlfv ^f4n4* 

Ol« sieniijr r»afinlto practical •■anctioiio 

Man«» says, tiie «qa.eaalon "ba.„tlf«l.. ha« b«^e not obH^^tor. r . .k , 
«*•♦.,_„ ODXig.,tory for the cliRraoterilaatlon 

fact «hathar thqr ar. beautifia fror, tho »nterpomrv r,nln^ «<- ^ ' , 

my talk about tha art of cshlidr«. «r <.k _.. ^ -«'Pi'»* 

*<- W4. Qiuj.aren , of tha art o^ th« m«»/^ ü. 

'.-»» .»r» t.,t .„o«i, ^,^„ ,,^,^„ „ ,, ..^.^^,,,_, ,„ ^„_^ ^ 

^Tvn..^ s.oh an apppo^ch U> .rt as abaolutaly oorvect. Th« coneept 

-^ actlv..ty v^at«.^ cc^rtlr^ the c«.^^Uon of Une., clor«, tone« and rt^yth«.. 
•^eclsej^ .,eh a concopt of art can .cccrrfln, t. -'un«. ^oour.,. th« d^.Oop^^t 
of scientific aesthetics, 

T. riun«, ass^ts th.t a v^rk of art ,.«.st not nec^saril;, b. bcuutiful 
e. aest.>,etlcall^ attmctl^ i, ,^^ ,^ ,, ^,,^,^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^ 

»ay«,it i. tepo3^bl« .^ Undt the a^. of art to 5-7 apecl«. T„ it . J be in- 
clu.«, not only palnt..„,«,tn.., ..a1.c. ,o.^^.aa„c., th. th«tr. 
but ^ oth^ fieia, of hu,«., activit.. A^ «,s«B acccr^ü.^ to Li« al^o 
i«ddu«t^, dt. ,^^,1^, huabandry, pUstic »uxT.ry ar^. cns. eti«s. CHCl«.rv ani 
P^fu»«... arts a..o act i. an a^t.etia «,., «, t., ^.er s..«, an. a.. at proaent 

i«pite ..« r.c„ of x^o lii^tation of thaso seiae. in ti^o perc,p* 
tion of conplaic foms, (icoordin," to tho plti-M^M,. »« * / 

«V t. e « .-i-i tf art also arxcii^sa«« gaatrenrajy , 
, the ».ep«„.«or.. of m„.^u3 alcohcUc baren,:«, coanetic ^ of «■« Udy. c3othing' 
colffn« . tattooC as a a«, of ort cI.r«ot«rleti<=for a .^^„«^ ,,.,, ,, ,^^^ ' 

m«öt of ma:ikind). i^jaong arte ?\inro liste tÄ^f .^-. # i 

of tho acceptod nona» of bdiavlor, 

;°; to d^pa^.f; '"''• *° *°'«^-« »-^ i" P^-ctlcal ucti.;.ti.^ of r^n in ,ene«l 

^"""" ■*""■' i^ ^rtl3tlc- imginatiy. fanctior». and t>Ms ^near« also ita 

ld.olo.<^c«l conte t, «fc -.,^„« tri« to H«>tivat« br 1^. «odal sltu..Liou (,*ieh in 
lt. «aence is profoundly corr«*) to the affect that it is i.po:,.ibl. i„ art to cli^d. 

tha Ainotional and the aest-^etlc^l fh« «^.^ i * ^, 

eBt.oUcl, theu«rf,a ard t;-.« b«utif«i. Hut in .»ncrati^ing 

this «V,«tion rx^nro attrtbut« to it an an«,icl«l, «rtr..ely .Tatort ed Um i„ 
.«lertlng that anr practl^ ..ctivity of ^n can be pl,..ccd >rlthin ^t. By Uä, tok« 
Ott. .i.e bonlo^ino bctwoan the a„t..«tdcal and ^^.e r^.^e3.H«tical, .<,,.«„ ,,. 

«foy aa blo „«1 out. Al..cB^ ■Jovey ^e c:«<roloped auch a 
Acoordin, to I.,«,. ,« >««, „f .^ can be good b.. itetff. i,, ^j„, 

dapcnd« on tho queötion aa to how it ttm^^ ^4. 4., 

• n«* It .«nr« dli-ectay or indiroetly t .!«finit. ph^. 


of aestiietleal or/other «p^ience. "VJortcs ox rt ^^ 

. .^ . ««i */^nRt;aa- can onlv b.3 ^-ood iubtrumentaliy as maans of 

as such -i3ictar€ß,po<an3,«3i* scaiatvaa- can ona.y v»« ,. 

tn .«ithetiC , P.H9) ü 1^ nace^sa^ to sUf thai. t.h«e aasertion» of Mnnn, al« 
/litc^ally colmlde -Ath the «presaion« of tha mesm.c,i«t Da.,r u.x«.t art a. «p-rl« 

In the # 3 the esscaice oI tl-e method of i*«m>o in aoath*iCB is 
deacrtbed. «un«, regardo, as the oau.o of ihe obati^t. refu^l tö to ,rant a^^^ics 
the right cf ecnai.denning itself a3 a sclerKo .Ue *«i Ü3ap,.ointing remats of all 
attenpt« to a.nLy the scientific Nnct^.od to ^e .^, wMch u. iU wer. f^ JJfJ/«^ 
re.Ur^. arÄSSi^ .nd can^t >. ^^»^ to .^. x^l l-u und ««Kitx«tt«-t«, 

lc«r. IB addltiou ,l*m« Centimes , th. ^^^'^^^ ^^ ^^^^^^^ '"-^^ ^'^* 
that 3Clcnce ha. pone anyway too f^.r In «Oq^oöttg id««/vorld to lavr. and cla88ifl»«tio: 

i ther 8ome fieW 1. left mrfcouchai arvd accea^Lble '^;^"^*^^"''^* ^* '^"^ *" 
presenrod ue the «ptoJ^«iaeaOBöM ea<«T>e ^«im «ttiboaQoi«« htancinim daye of llf«. 
«G»y iB an theor,", th«gr 3«7. and all <^^rr^ lly nt its touch. Ix' ^iet«.« mst d«ad« 
^t it pmotrates,!* us not hartr to aprily it to the arta..« C^owrd 8Ci.ance in 

'hL«8thetic8, p. 4* 

Httrm> 18 of the opdLnion that ir. ord^ to d«iJ« the i,.u€etion .^«th* 

a,stheU.c» can be a "adaie*' thi. i^pmäa i.i t,h^. ttv^'. pl.«^ on ^lat we inclade in 
aeati^ettca a«i aeco«i on h«r we rtefine "«iar.c^-. 'Jn^.il the fir»t wrW >ar, I'uim, 
writ«, »r^ Scholar» reducod se8th«t.ic8 to a deftidtton of b*uty,to an analyjd. ©f 
its natwe and cirifccrl*. «eing wnsiderod a branch o£ spee>il»tiya priilosoRhy aeethetlc« 
defin^i as a "tJiiloscitiy of beauty". 'ftinro stA^ t^-^t if aest!iet.ic8 U 'jnderstood 
a diacipline vhid» tties to detewino th« -inlTcraal !•**« o' baautgr and of i^ood 

*^Mt.m. It cannot b^eoina a actwce or even a HtJonA pa^ßroieiT« branch of philasoiiiy. 

•^■^^ ■ 6^«TlT.3ntal 

'ihe only"la--»''that it ia able to est^bHA- ar« flaBd;.lfl/''t8tripuion» of aeef stic 

phenomena for Inetaaca the t«Benoy of dofirdt^ braad;» of the arte to inluen«« in 
auch or other way certat. loontfi defintte jFTCupc of paople vr«i*>r deficite cirtwmstai.e«. 
Minro llrfcs tha questaon Wicther aeathetic» can be a acieijce /directly ^^.h 



the definttion of soience in geneoral« As a foundation of the defiidtion of scienc« h« 

*akefl the intarpr6(batidn of mbstor In the "Höir Tntexnatlo«il Hctionary " ^iloh oonsidel^s 

iB the e33enee of Bcience "the Observation and clasaiiicabion of f^tcta.*, the 5ötsbll»h- 

menfc of goncral la^«, in theaain ^my by induction and li3^poÜiesia.»"("ro<^pd aoios^ce in 

aesthötico", p, Ö?)» VÄ>rthy of attention is the «aooi/or pxt>oX by xnoans or widan i^unro 

tri«e to eetablißÄt the «clmtific eeaaice'and correctness with such & pronovmö«dly 
poaltivistic i^nt urpr^^tion of ecjence* Tie concepb ci sciarice öhould riot be limited^ 
¥xmrt) Justly statee, •whore -Uie h±j^dta p7;^vifl[ , w|a Bl quantitative i!ieb.ö\iraaont8 so niiaract- 
erisrtlc for the natuxcil »ciences are hiohly devoLopod* In audi aa ovötA Uie fact is veiled 
that the Bubjeet whl<* is a ccienoe can only in the courae of & vmy jjoxig ti^ae approac^ 
only [nradt;iali.y Uis hi^i eocactitude and the LagigKi rigoroua lo^lcal deiionavialloiu 
Brm tbe math einatical eeienooÄ haTe not^ becc^ne accorvling to his oplraou abnoltjtely 
fpQ^ct» ilitirefore the other aoienoe« should not be discoumgtid oy th*4 T^Aot that th^i' , 
»tili l&tk the 9Qm±npXy nmemmry ewaotnetfs. 

ßtxid here Vvtnro reaehee a p^arf ectl;^ »urpdLsiug ck^ncluaion, Jt th( 


üxnctneaa is not indispensable In the BCientfes ,then ühey nii^y iiioit tl eneelvoe to th» i 
d«ecriptigjri of faet« ^he saye«( Ijkxtsonoestieagxatf llie Ciueaiion i^ of euch scie ces 

^Äiich encoaipfcöe pli «ob2i«i ufeiob do not peraeesa perf octly aetcrr^doiiÄi quautitHtrive 
propeities» This r^ex» iasrcftam foresiiosrt to the socual aeieiicee^the arts c^nd aeetlieües)« 

The hi^t>©rioal^ tfclaj scieiicos accorling to 'Urjno describt only individ\ial 
evt-nti^t?W' ecit^-üsh only genoml tendencies but not laws of a »' i^ew^ordan typef ♦ 
From th%,poiD^ of viaw of i^inro the social r6||pdariti6« are Ixx prxmiplo difforent from 
the natural la^^thor€€o2?^ t!ie social ecienctss ahould rkot concein UiüLiiolvc^ 
iiirestir^at:lom of re^ilarities amlogieal *uo the natural 1l.w3 but should liiiit thenselves 
to dlnple analyeee of £acts« Bat this deümitation oJ^ the ntbural and social sciences 

. 3 * 

\ >,'■■• ' ' - ^ j • ' 

docai not prcvent l^ui^ fpoci deveiLoping the theeis tliat wo ahould di^il ir-ip^irtially 
" norwriluationally" v^h J/he j^tural as voll as with aowial ph xwhisnii^ nly the ciis- 
interested appi'oach provee to b« txnily scientific umier all circur;istanc «« Therefore 
he considers am abeolutely incorrect the sopSurÄtion of etrdce (^-nd ai^^t. etios as 
as normatiTo diacipünes concomod witli -»aluations frt» ' deacrlp^^ive un^js ^(Imllrw wlth 

U" , 1.0. the mtuml Bcia-ces. As va se<i ^^mt> In om respact »harply contrfistt 

, r 

mtuid aiKf. the f^cial aciencos but In arx^Vner on« hö Identlfloe them (puts tl-icsi 
bhe 9.m6 pl^ne). "bis i» typloal for th« |Kjrlti^.frtic viefpoint« TIilö rrtttch lo to say 
r the rejftctiott ot* the broad gonarallaation and i&^ ob Ciiii^^of^bouj^ ob5«-K:ti-/i«n. 

Irunro tidnks that thi 'prefelsai' ^f the of/;^ scientific a^iBtiiotic» beglii'fe^ 

welop &pprD:dJ5nt«l7 arouti! MM x^hi^Y^^ V)^. This vß^s d-iie first of all to thi3 
aodLstarica of a sijüt'ficient mu^er of croations/or all i*:xridiCHödteadt civjllls^ttion«, iju tlon- 
alltloti on a illi'f ea^ent legreo of d©Yelop^-aIfcy^^m'o £^28f tcuc!i9?5 'upon the^queBt^ö»- 
on tho x^le of the social fjclences in the df^elopmtait of aeatheticg, llj^ir acdarecienti 






ronder posv^ble accordlxl^^o his opli^ion /t?>e knoVIfxlS'^ xtöc th« ^ItTtatlon of the 

arta aii^i the artiaii in dlf fareut epochö ^i KiirareiTt countries, Th<5ry hQL?.p to 

' ■''/; , ■■ ^ : •■:. /. /T) Du. 

understani tiie cr^ationa of art riot iaJr^ßy^ at O'>;locts of actK>3it5on in a laDusfcm^ 

• * 

but In conriection vdth the «ultuml atyle in viiicri tiicy ocounred " Ineluiü^g r^li^XouBp 

■ '^\ 


ioclal^econojnioal ,iaorai,technological ixilgi oUi^^r factors^^jlt ±u nocet» taihr torarjäHc 
tnat %iit»o In acirdttinf': the Influeancli of tho social con^litions o art and aest ietic» 
is unafelo to 

1. . 


Mäfw$äm what is here noöl iioipoitant and d«»fi!7ite^ he enlir«ly i^norea 

T H 

asp4?ct oC cliasiiVy ' 
^ Acconling to thö opinion of "\inro ctcpeiienoed tha laost bonefi\.lal influ^c» 


^Jl»n pcychology» IJJ.thout aci entl/ic pij'wolonr^he asistirt«, aeöithetJcs öarsiot only with 

I . -iJ ■ 

!^e Wta pow^r reach a ctaM/inLletartj^rdiV of art. In th© T>r(?8ent time,he continu^ao. 


t^eill-Jitfe^ft procf^se« of fco^lrj^^p'-a'ceotion, of ^mt>vf ,of vdll -^ind of ^öritlon of 
and Ä type» of dianrct^ -i * ^>*-* 

hnMts/ard tlioroue^ily jjtudi edi Ml th;^e oi>or»»*!«aa at*© an inta^rrnl mrt in the creation 

and conir^reheriaion of tho wprto of art, TAinro pits on the flrst plan the rrlapf poycho- 
lo^ Irr art ajid a«öthetloi üi crdor to"h4T?'|i')?<^ßia fei^ the «ft^^lan ^tion/aU disposltion? 
aorta bf taste a^r^ cjdnlone/of fan ^- hii^4f^";(on the bksla of * is Ty>rson ?ity). 


*-HThi#«ferÄ a» an iJlerttable/conclusi'on öf'th^ reas^-nfV^v^s of "^xvYx> the idoa follow» 
th^t th*.loTelophQnfc1of th/e ädcteJL «ciwifiis }^-9 Vm^JiTOller iratorUncaf or the 
oriritürf üci6Kftlflc aej?tfetlt;s t^Äi\ ^*: <3 Ä<*^iie.V''r^]nt8 df pa^/cholo^^ 

: lfctt£y> re*ice8 ^U method^ wafÄitiftllly ^-ö Vn'^nalyais of tha aoathctlc f 


Wd the ft8rshol0|d*.l rou«datiom^-5fths'cr^tiv<,ar<' corni.tlvc la 
öLcussad in #4. Muux. thii*. ttet Che U^k rf the sc .IkVHc md^hod In *.«thetic. 

^•■'vV ., 


ahould not be unlf?rntood ae an ftttanj^rt. to detaidiio wwL beaaty ia or fch„ dwire 
to •wluato ba-iuty. Ao m^tJrd is i»f. dlr=,cted %o an uiulysis ol' ..rt in a laboietor; 
«»r or to the est/*li£-hnent of un«hoJ.abl-3 law« of th« cr<«tlre p^vceas. he sdent- 
ITic mrt.;-,o* ia according t. riat^x,«« opintcr. -Bouebhü« auch .»re iffiS» 
«uch t„d<MiH and ;t«tot*« « C «Towd gai<.T«a ir» a«t.,«tic« ,p.m ), In hl. 
bcok -"Bie sciei^if «eihcd In aeati^etics« he dal^ ix. the foliowu« ,«y the ««mc, 
of thiB r.^,hod: " thi3 i3 a daccriptive, nattu^aUstio *pproa«h to aest oti« >Aich 
achculd be broacü^ e.-i.Grim«.tal and mpLrical b«t v^t limited to qi.«ntitative m*mipe. 
««nt-^utilizinc art crttlcis:« aM piilo.-cphy as hypot: «««/oot^ objeotiv« 
data fror, two nourc^a- tUe analysie and hiWoxy of ro«a in the arte ,.nd psyohologle- 
*1 attili« of tl,e un-lorstandirv: bk! taaching of the .irt*..^«, incüspemable is an 

lrical,relatlrt3t,ic appix>ach to aesthatic vum.t.ion And to ae«th«tic eU.^vd..'- (aon»). 

I (Teward ocience In Aesthafeics, 

IWo div«J the fiefd of a3Ht;,etic8 toriw^t« a« an a-X^il 3Ci*,co Into two 
ftindam^^ital gn^ttpa of ph«,o..^a. I^e flrst one ijonnlBts of ihc cr.atlon« of art 
thanao-ves ( palnti,«..,, poema^Bjnnphoniea «tc. )>. the «-K»rc? on« .. of 'Jio oorr«,p- 
ondliig form of hunan <icti-,3.ty-( tho cr^atire p»T>ce«.s, the aastNtie «partonc«, 
the e«>tive .«^etious. the proces»« of pm.«ption, «n^e«t..ndir^, otc). 
Bie firat git,up of phen«».T»a belorra to aßstheAle -notrholorj'- t>,e st.^iy of fon. «f 
arti«T.ic craatlons. .tho cec.,»d one boloir» to' ^srcbS^sy ai.oi^ wlth wclolory, 
anthropology and t.S. o'.h.^ social scienc«. Both th«« err^upa, Ihxnrc «y,, 
the eane phe.«uem ora.y f.^ a dlf ferent polnt of yi^, Tn th<, .esth«ti«ai norpholoor 
w conc^Arata « cur .tt^^tion on the ««es of art, m tho e...t:- H.5c.l p.yoholl,y on 
the pecrle wi.o creato and «tt^t^f^rf '.haa, ' 

Ihemindif.'iculty, ^ *«t.hetic nornholory coneietB in th.. coapl«r- 
ity, ^.btlc«e^ and varl.*y of arUatlc fom, a.corr.1.^, to Kunm. 3^m^> ccu3id«« 
a. tiDi one of ohc> fanrfemental pi-obleo« of aestb-ttc .v.r^olofv to red..ce this 
«om>U3 diror^ity of fcnna to cna definition. t. find 3on:e airua. prtnoijaea 
«pproprlatc at the aawe ^.mo to all bronehee of of art. 

As the n.aln factor «t in the «raluation of artistlc croatlcn. -uni* 


l«r,^i^ ^ ü,^ ^ . _^ ., Pr«5lsaly .rtisttc f^m «ith total 

•' »-«■ a. acute anrl. .• ,„^ ' ^' ''"'^ ' ^"*^ *»« ^^^«^- 

P^rts ,^ thu^ai^.^ ,wlthcut reeanj tu «>.«, oblect, tW . 
»sunxY, propesea to dafixio fom .1« n 

^» "ot om,- a p^p^^^ ,, ,^ , , ^ '^'- '^"^^ ^-^"^ ^''^ -thetic Ton. 

r« X , ' llne3,colors, intiediately »««.-4,.^ . 

«utjxtlve facto» g«,^t« i« y,e laarlaation «n .^ ^~~^ 

-. .ODjtx!ts,et'mcs or more abstrect concents. 4«---, 

;. X. .«is ciavi3xon into real a«l ui^^eal facto« it 13 not «Ifr. ,* 
•ndeavor t. ..eUndt In a. ort,:!«.. ,,y »., , ^ "^'''''^^ ** ''«• ^»>. 

clalr* ae th. o^y ohJ«.ti.e ... " ^"^ i^-logloal ...^^ „^ 

■^ «'^jecriTc (a<ä-c'Äit In the artiÄtie v* ..4 

•>•» ocjecx, ^,; oh ö natura of th« «»,k<--* 

'ins positlviotlc ap-,w.c, ^. .,^.^^ ^^ a«st.,etlc. ,»3 I^iff ^'^ 
conce:.!«, .e«^.,.tlc cate^orloa. Us aa entlrel. ** '^ '"^ ''•^■-*'^ 

altuaticn or .ha ,uc»t,.. of ae,t^„^le cat^orie. a. tha ,7''"'^"'''' ''" '''""* 
dl,^ to :-^« o^,^on 1.. an a.atract .^ . ,,.^ , ^^ "^ "'^ '" '^^°^^- 

,. . **"^ ''*•' ^'"^tlonal cat^rorlaa ,a,r. 

rui^th.touoh^-^. - tc« ^.«a ana an..^,.ci.,. .c«XT ' '""^ 

-j * * .- , 'ictiordlflg to ..unro'o ootnion th« i 

«iatcnc. of broaa .eeth^ic concepta 1. ju.tlfl«, b«t tha. ,H 1. . 

bttt thv ahoiOd be conatmctod In • 


fflore Inductiv« aiid eBqperimentÄl väij. 

Th« «fdn fuctor« are accominfc to l^nro's opi- 

niou the mtuTB of the aeothetic objaot and ch« natur« of Ui« perolplÄit ßubj«ßt 
on ^iqm the duiraater of tbc aestnetlc «cp«rienc# fundamfaiUlly d^p^nriw. Hrjs art 
and the a^tl etical in gen^ml los© undw them all objective fnn.!at1.on and tha psytjholog 
of the pe««i.ving «ubjeefc rLem Vj pi-eewlnettt laportaüce in the em'L^tion oi the 
artlatie creatioru ^are !• in fae* üxo subjeotivw^dealistic ii*-rp)i-«b*t3on of M th» 

»«sth^lc perefiptio>i# 

instead of tha meni.cnad v.nä aml^ed aoBtiöiäc i'-.i.tcjror' .« Tlanro 

propoa« bo tiee sny term«. oft«! aaed in artistio critician. la pax-t^.cuTAr ^e he pondew 
eoi^siderirc aa aeothdiic cat««jrt«i 8uoh i.djwtiv« aa " «gr«t<aloas', ■'po:j^«'w=^^ "faat- 
Idlous", m3LalJAOÜ..-3Jj > A «u-s Substantiv« fdacadence', "aatitimantality',, ?,*pro?fdon« of the 
typ» Ulf "sufc3iu8 stylrf' «tc. A« foras of aestheldc caterorL« oouM aecording to hU 
Tieirpoliit be ttced also th« nwB0B of ths haro6» of uoae uell known ai-fciatlc creations. It ia 

posBible, Kumt) PfftintrJünE, to gaiaraliae tho .-»tyle of • dafinito mptA wtr.onality or 
epodi takon ae a *.+ol« ar^ u«o it for tlie chract *iaation of tn.» srt of ctfier «pochs. 
aus for ija?i-ance f or f.EyVx>dy f ant'.liaif %ÄtJi Venetian pfllnUng it will bn c3 sir vtat 1« 

■ V 

meant wlien it i» »id tiiat a eiv«: riovÄ has the pmpftrty cf Vonetlan richmoe and 

BunQjtikousnesB • 

flfcort if we afnce ''vith ;axM^> -iii^t tho pi-obl«m of aostlietical csit af oriee, 

has Mt round the nece^^arr clAiäfieaUoB we caiuiot nercartiieleno oc.nco3e tliat Uie 
Miy pwpoeed PS' hi-n ainpllii« «da queation and contrlbuteB to it the indlsf snsabl. 
elartty, Manw apoaale In mnmv:* for tvhe r,«ianciütion of bn>ad i?^cmlij»--ioi« since 
he pn»^»- t«, rai.o ar^ t^ «r.atever ^^^/.«'«..^^-«/-^^«„^^olT^^nTB S7m.,mir^ 


.^ In desirinr^ to avcid the acknowl edp nent of the class 

<epend3nce of irt -unro ninirdzes its objective Contents and tries to exn].ain its in- 
iluence on^m.^n by pnrely psycho] oc'ical ciuses. vPi^efore the - est^': tic psvcholopy 
v.ach is dis-ussed in ^ 5 assiimes such a speciall- ininortant wei,?ht.:^ut even in' the 
Held of psycho lopy ::unro gebs into coiflict vdth «11 the same class r>:'oblgiis since 
xhere c^nnot be any social science not connected >dth society and ihis meaiis 


^^^ cl'iss B tliat di\dd9 it* In amlc^jjag the ps:nholofry of the perception of art. 

tlio cr^gatii^e process ^he stcrbs from a concept of tnan hs 301:10 abötr^ction 
iiarkc • • ; 

havliw: fio |SQ!aaGxt±30i of his tijue and oonditionst ÄöOKJdKR Ihmid'ov^ taa cxpositioi 

of t;ie yiolö and the tasks cf psyohoio.^ in aesihd^ic« does riot h^^p luaro to sunnoui 

the abstioct diartcter of hia aesthotlc syatam • i'^nd in the ps:Trho3jDry he ooncontrat« 

hlf? fuiyiamöntal attention on the perc^s^tlon of the subtle^awon« of fonr^ Kanr» nvoidi 

cjveryyh^c to adcj^crdedgo *ho cl^s« dltferencea in idiijolopy &nd p^joholo^j^ ^*9i he 

the sarte 
»ays t£:At .hera are no t>>#D iixliirldx^^lB wöo peirceive in the jäi-ic w.y ^ picture, 

Ke eönßidere th*v*0by it^n cKclu^iveiy ä« a biological bein^, he nerlccts ^-dth thlM 


the fact thct he la alPO " a tot&lity of all eocial 


eh a roncepfbion 

of the pcycLeloi^r of mrn ie aocox^Ürig Ic blie opinion of hmro corpletoLy siifflciowt 
He ie douliuited Ly the t^ought tmii ü all peoplo vioulö g^ tia fxmtl:-i±':. c^^ucatlon 
and l'^ni to unieratand and *ral\ute bsaiity, Uieu wooUi orgürdcally dq -jiaUle '<: cr^te 
evll^ Ife^ciTth eleno tho i^Tiorlj^^^ of the oortewte of ideM in art laads to tT)e>o0iJ.ii 
that <?v^eri tl^e fil^ht inte the fleldof peycholojry docc not hAp one to clari^y w^e in- 

fluenctj öf i^^rt oa iiu», ' 

^,^at is 'rhiiU "Uie x\:>le of pa^tjaciogy :i:n aoathetics tror^ ^:li.a polnt cf ^nj«»^ 

•' ' • » 

of Mttnrd? He ccnsidcra tae crcctipn» of ^Tt a« an enacidble of de^inite nt^jr.ili tci»ctxtie 

an ciöotive flKpGirtaftce anc alec asisoöiationi aad lnt<«Tpret«tion on t>he **ound$.tion 

of^ry *^nd pt-et cucpiTionöo. In linMlmr the a 00t heil -^ mornholorr vi th witli Psychologie 

al p<an>eptior; :mi2X> ;ftatt^ caat the analysie of form r^Yee in peyd-^olorLcnl dia-tnels« 

It ic poeelbls only ü€«ause of u<^n|e ablUty to p<ärceive^ to fuel^Lo evaluAto eto^ 

■ ■...•. ^ ^ •■• , 

Anothev jiir-»e oi tJi^e peydiolo^iaal appiX)Äoii to 'iie analysie of aru i« oo-ntälnod In the 
study of '^he pceoa cf tl o aHiait, cf the proceaaeo ,c<mscl.cmfl ae v«}Jl a» ur.contjclouo , 
dct 8X!rJ.nii\<' the crei-tiv^ pi'ocesa« 

Mnxut) invo3tig.A«s öeparatoly ewrei-y brandi of peyclioloßy atvi thoso pc -ni oi liiie* 
that could be unod i'or tho üv/cacprient of ai^th etiea» "The eituation cc'.LT.s i-iMun-^xj 

wrlteo-," for ucco actdve Cooperation between psychcloplcr^B anni ecnolars ..-or^^.n^^ In 

Art nistorjai'S, 
the fi«ld of <^rt» jtteicJhl- aiBi l aitfi ^ i finrcfc cri*ic8,and aesthcÄiciane #^oii3.d lG?m r.cro 

about eacl^i other and vjce 


.." (Tae peycliology of art,T»art,pren«nt,fTiture. The TourrÄl 
of Aesthotics ^rt Criticism, r/)3*Vol. 21. o. 3,p.^65.) 'i'he»qr/tc the oid-lml fusion 

fl and mutual cmldiaont of deobhcfoics and payciiology ifuriro se«s in tha follovdng: 
1# ) a !iiore active use of introgpectiya data ,8udi aa r«no7*t8 by indlvidtjalö on 

thelr ovtn aHistlc and aefjihetic exp^rleficm^ 

2,) Regarding ^yrt aa a Jcind of bdiarlor, xbe ßBkiiig^pei^forrnipg ,chc dxijoyi.ip: of ari, 

lU tl>o3o procesisos have to,t«^i r vdth intcnial ^subjectivo phaa«« alao »vejrt objecbive 

ph&aes. '^^lüxV'at laast can bo escplorad and obaervöd ,to yield ompirical :^;^cti5 Tor th# 

psyc^ioloiy oi' art » 


3«) '-'^re attijfibion to tho pIiil.o3f)phical aspects of psychol-ogy* imeiican paychology, 
munro notoo^ incllnea in an li:qporb^xit way to aipiilclssa and n^tuiulianoL alUioiAgii it often 
doea not think out iba phllosophicjal positicn» 

4. ) and flnally a oipre historlcal and social approadS, ^rly pBychclOi?;y «oiimsized 
thoae tr^its of behavlor find tfcperience which wer* thoußht to bc wdTörsal In hurtÄn 
natura» lat riT cn itiany oT tiie traits described l^ raycliolos/ vere specific oray in our 

contcigporary culture, -eople act^f e«! and tliink xxxf difi*er©ntly in diff erent pertod» 
of culture, RcceiA ptjvcholofCT oM^h ciorö &ctaoxLodg<.>3 those dif feren^es» 

The cona.irJextition of tU thesc iorand» acconiin^^ to riunro'« idea« i^v.ia aid in 
acconqpllMliiiig the majji taf4:5 th-» desc/.tipbion am ,iXpL^na&ion of hitraftn behairlor emd rola* 
tionsVdp to the work» of ^rt« 

inrJöt«xjn'Jijai»»±€4^:äe^^^ /It» ioupji the social a«p.9ct is cont alr» cd in tho 
enuracre-ted abrr ra^r:ir€taent«,«äCitBr the lütter iß doßlt ;vitii in an eBcbx*aEn.j»ly abstract rn&nn<?r. 


Ani "wi^cit is the r;ß.in tliippr- thetflass aj?p^.>ct disappears her«» 

The socond chaptor (öcillcat of l^ :? disSs-jrUition) in devot erl ~<v the theory 
of artistic eüuoation, "he falsit:v' of thö initial assua^jtione of the ccsthetic concep- 
tion of ':liom%:r i 'niiix) is espocially ötidkinf: tf Tüien he develope on th?ir Imsij hie 

Views on :^o8t:i0tic ed^xation. Fis ped^ f ogioal thoory i3 djröcted tr» th« kno^lnrly falee 

* - ■ - ■ 

char-nele ;-rhere t rre nre no dirari; links vitl^. social^ cj/iss probleos« unrr> coneeivtmt( 
aU bis attention on the ne«-.hods,!x^t on the eiirs of taBiching^ He vritoe ^^aaii a^out 


how he t^aie» and aq^iressee theroby ot'tw» interoetiug ideas but he xjctxm dasirea to 


4^ . "»»'juac acqiiire mcrely t'-«» r•/lt^s^-•44.,.• ^^ 

^' '-^t. Out CTr«a thla t«. . «-^P^cHy of arjDroclat- 

^sn t.lg task mrrowiri its^Of airv«i f« >. 

'^ or foT?n and 3ty5fe. »m^Tixa- 

*i..3 m aestlictlc öd.ia-?tir.n ^c-arrU*,,. ♦^ 

^tils Is in the flrat niA^* 4.v, ^ . ® «cprea« 

»^^ WXA9X, pjace thQ devsIftTvnrMf ^^^ < i 

er th3 chiicu -m. ««,„«i ,,^-,, ,^ ,^^ •' ' ^-^-= i-Hnatic« 

or art bat ,ua, 1.. any ocher ri.^d. ,^^ .j^, . 

Poc "^--^™' ;orthc,cHacat1.north«f.aU:v.«ofr,apcrt fov^ .^ 
natloas. M tho foundatlon 'of «veiy hxa«.^t . . 

H« the d«ilre to of a h*^ 4 -«. .tlinr to unro .hould 

,rJ.-i* ^4. *, ^ '*^>'<iU)p3ont of iwruorullty In th» 

3pl2lt «f thü Greelc ±<mx eMd .In the «.oJuc'^*- - -' 

« . ^4 ^* ■ ---J-^-^r. ..^xwBlsBlon t« e,,,^, „t.d«t of 

fIovr>rthÄlosa t!,Q ffect a\n- r.„ ,- 

"'*'" ^^^""^ ^-'^* '-'^«"^'^•'«1^ i'^ detail th . 

-na... ar-ear« to b«orK5« 5«,ra tho «BB» To -i^n . •, ^ 

>-,".-iu.i. jjii..jf.f;ophlcal 


vieirpolnts« ."unro renoar f^ily stiässa» it! hir VArk* that we rhc.- Id )ot ^.©velop Ja tbe 
children the aeefioticÄl and artxstic capacitl^::» 'Mi^^Otrh aH rc^:'ucÄl to >k5oiwiC9 and 

he aayif 5.n tii<iLr -ra>dnrr.^ nodol:! and o^h^ f c^rs^a of artjstlc r.ct.b/ity »^ a:lorify th« 

st.^jif: regime and oqsreöji ats id^ils arid ant^vonlsro»,»' ( "Ait niu^:rv: ioa^' , p*277 ) 

4 > 

is in hl» oponf,on oene and the sama, ) Ht^mt'Tr« carr?ot be trulv ircir^tic* " If hl« 

atten-^lcn ,he ivritv« ,ic «aotodtSBxtaPCB alrov^t ^lolly xto on th»i i32ustr^^t5.vo and 

and social fiuißtit>r^, tlie essence ot aest>*»tla f(>r!f Ig ecllpiiod." ("Art 3rIiioa ion'*^p.2Ö5) 

bjüme f aults the 

In the dis3^rb?rti(3aa r%in3no«8 nttmipt i« ferltlci^ad to aacarfbrtbc Ol »rjjrcs of American 

«ducahioiaal ö^st^fe» In ilö»««!.«^ orflly 3rt:öc'Ä b«d of^tirdsatinn of U ntoiiAiir^^ pr<.oo««,of 

the itinjf fijecleait preparation of thf» teßclili?r ö^Jrea vMch j f^:^^^ rl^^r-rly M.a 

deutvn to pu^ i^ie sotllsment of the nue»iloji o.^ icßtlaetic ed ciiticn ou' ftnle of ^t^cial- 


,und eccnoi^lcHl i-elationd ot aocldby^ 

Tlie posiliiviatic a-.^ü*oadi to ae»b> eti. s :«Än also apparcnt ii^ the iKraMsr« 
iBKlerttc-^ndlm- of r>.rt as the laalrj l«V(«r cf the <^oc±^l procanr.^ "He aocv nd nararraph 
is devot ad to th^i ar^-ilyelaof the ideQ3^1atie conceptioxi of ''a:to of tl^io pvor^sa of 
social de/e?Lopn-in'i. >uiHX» apeakt"^ continuous^y abo^Jt iho iu?ceüa:ty of conru*cti?.xr the 
aeathetie oducation -dtu raany factorsi rs3ttets)qp y^liticn^ sndal ordiw^te^ olon'% 
religion,pliiloGophy, öcitmce etc. Dut thio re.tiir.e uith hi.i. öh errpty TörtlUfc-^j or It result« 
in th« ideft that !iot ^^conorlaa^ an:' oodlal relationsVipa detaiiilafi in the L st iTi^tanCf» 
the charactar of trio developLient of mich ouparBtmctnnl pliotx>m«^a lik© culture^vrt^ 
but on tiie cortx^ar-y ,the luttar nay and should midfcjt a prisaary i/^uence on the mutual a^ nien inaide oue'a co^intry ae i^ell ai in Uie inttsm^tional tür.ienf?lcn* 

EBpecia3JLy art nö;- accoislin^: t-j ni» oTdrd.on w«^.'-*?! 'hc tht) vacL«*!^ rellyious^'^oc-^al and pol- 
itloal contradictioiis. If art doaa not al^eya sr ievix: tlda unifictiloi.y rol^,'.his in i^c- 
cordin^ to ti^e o?l:lo oi' i unxx) <jDcplaincd br the fict t».al »^lilv:e all c her creat In«» 

atruirtentfl of hunnn li'dxig -lü:e aci€»»ice,co'?iier5e,7-oii?ion, art ia a two-e^Va-J wcapoii. 

tn the hlatory of civilisatioi; it ia aor 

uaad to unii^.e p^^pl^^ aoaetireea X'O IncJta 

antiVp;onl3ni» bc^wr*an th jxl^ tc 


people for anoth^ar 
the hat r Ol cf one jodttsm tnm3»lO!m:K«tDPSK% and 

thö atru^fle betweon the cla/i««i,'' ( "Art Sdiicatiori«, p. lAl ). 'Tb.e complex diftlectic 

of flutuftl relationföiipa ot ecoix^mioal, politlcal^cultuü^l factor» :'unro mbstittxtas 

i>y th« »uxfici^^itly nal/e ««äcpa^amtlon that all triia reaiflt» i'jx»»^ th« fact thal?w6 

loav« urt " tr>o often i^r-uhe iiaÄie.x>f a^lJrisi^i^ W or deRlörs in r ^^a" ^rt S(3ti<»ti< 

P» IU9). The cn3^ s&lyation l^iiiiro ©e^sa in the Taict tliat art Vaould b# piic ±f±cthe hanc 
thouFTitrul . - -' • ... ■ . 

of ••tMjwidnr, peo53.e V <tf' rood Adli**; ^i^^^^^ tlBD»" good-^inod ar\l Miourh-oi'u! anp«-«r 

g ?Vi:rrxnientg of t he 
to -Wä x^ be the/ca^italistii '^ countrioö vtill« th© eoritiunists oaly ruin art fay 

forci.v': it to cezve tb»4r propagaftdistic aimö* - u»ro asaK^rts that tiie cortdition» for th 


davolopat^iit of art in u:iA are xrtocn /üöre fATO»ole than in th« öociaii^rt; coiirtrieS 
sincaii ia in /^Bv^rlca «ro3Ati/^> x>ö« trc^i propa^'-nia and th© proiisure of a 
DOlitioal ridJ.o-iot)hy...^\ ('«Art Bitt«a.iioxt'^p*277^) • 

Vaxtivo propere« to cremte a aiiigle center of coaturepa Oeiitcas* of btftuty and 
onjoymeiAt to «ijhioh tii» ^"Ind» ol m«n could tuim vdth oride; Re hao in irdnd f!i<me c^ity 
viiich would be in tha c<snt0i* of an iotarrÄtioml org;ü'dza*ion jtmnafoxv'.ad "into 
«a tinie int erriet ioual capital of civlliü«! culturi " "where an natlona nüI contributa 
their best in frijndlv rivali^, " Juoh a aiiy of Uie futuro^ T b«liv^a,>dl3 b« a tangibl 

■ • * .... . '* ' ■ 

(recil) foniAirtion for v^oxld siiiift«i4ßl-iip^ ab emotional Ijond between natlonp , a. . 
potorrtiiAlIcb^iwl of thcj.r cc r*:»n cultural haritv-^c^' («Art^ucatiorf' ,p«150). 

n»o author (of tJ^e Olüsortution) ahoinni that Munro ab?clntrly does not tako 
inte acocmit ^ho cnlc of Uie ^onoeiy^of tha ©ocial r«l«itiond.hip,of claso, 3trurido# ^ ■ 
H« confuüoö trua int<4i*r.tiomÜ*itti oI' poopl >8 vdth the ratnaTal of an claas contr?idietione 
and thlnkf» tliat odncat:.oi\ Aud art &xm alon« 8txt»nr anougii to J^tirrrjount ihm. Munro in 
belf-^ an iaauU>t;;ist o:- tho bo^i2^»ioib clcuk* cttiUJot i^ivo a cprrect Gxpl«'^nav.5.on of the 
derelopn^^jnt oi society ,of ^I^e real waye* in *dhich thia cJ^r^alopDiant r:waft* * .'M • 

nnally in th© l^at parngraph of the p:aconcl chapt#Ä« ffone <3oii- 
Clufd-oiis of l'xLnvo ccncmtTlri{^ the edticationtil practlee» adopte^i in tlie Zlm^eiAM Museum 
are dii^cuj^iecl, unro wi^tcs t>!3t h« iriae to »ndld the tmchlr»f tjDau hav^ii*^ r^j^ard. to 

three prcfp.Jt'ti'se of th« stud<j;.^:e ^pccrll;^ to Utedr a^ei 1«) the inta!lect*uHl r^«r a3.cpai9nt^ 

for ' 
2.) \}\c -ieeJreÄ vnelf-3y^^l:y'8lo , critiqi^e airl eetf^ritl^iye , ^•) th« sconnal dev^e^opa^ont. 


« • 


e t!iird er '^'i^iv^ aocial aeoain^ of ihe aeethöticÄ of i4inro' , in ihl» 
laplrcr the cantml pluco la '-iv.?n to a dispulaitioii ol' the ciaeflT.i.ora ar 1.c -jov 
unio -sivled-qß i.hc developLonl o'f art in the futui^. .hx3t thls riucxtir>n proveti to 
:>• that litmö y por x^-liicL re^r^lcd the tnie ossenca of the aeethetlc cftn?^^.©:!^ 
of '^riÄ, In th-c ^rfcicle '*Dc tiie Arte ?rcgr«sd? " Mxa-a naan^Morwi "th«it n-3©m a i.arr:' 

ind in:nntRritl&l ^mup oJL' int rHectiialft rmr holde 

that the Idea o ' prop^f^tifa 

- fts an outv»:>rn svpGvttLtUn, Uiat It ii^ faXa© as & koy to the vu>iarritan:*:*»f: of 

the hirrtcrloal proceßs^todwjbbciasi valn as a hope for th« futiire, ariü i^ rdBrniided 

a» an idti^I o** soc al dfr7e3/>p»ent" ("Do the arts px\)ßi-eßs?", "ce cJcirmrw of Aoathotio» 

and Art OriticifJiu^ 1955,yol^l7,%,2^,pa75) • ^^iurnö 3BdaB|/& aöi'önn^ oä^ proi-reari^ 

and clevxtyj to % pol^Tdcs tho artbi-pro,^reB«ivl»te a wiiole ivwibBr ol* s.i^icl©!n. 

In dafeii<üri^^, Lhc i^'lta of Evolution of art , ^nrw^ /hanro refere to tiie^^^x^: rif 

ii,Spt5n::er ^-Prcgrc-Sj i+5? law» and. Cixui^m'' \iiiol\ t.^cordiik^ to lila ordrdon ins t^-^e 

filmst tr^STii omtlc fttfUKpt to to the hinter/ of art the mturalitjtic th^Tj ot 

evolutlorw ^'^'v^er^ln devcaoplng Spencer«« idea« of evolntion isajaro io v>sj3^c« ^urin 

to such a n^'^/'tlon of prof-ras» in art na its direet cidtica» l'hie 1» y>^€t^tlj aptyzr^erit 

In hlö '4ri:ilysia cf tho cojiteapo3:^r jt art in ^«^^?rlca, 

'ticTe it iil orjy cp;e?rtic'i of the aatabHsliinerjt of f*icta :)nrr> dravo an irt- 

terorting nlctti:.^ In rjie kiiovni aexise»!» charactcalsitig the cor^emnorarr aitifation 

of UiericAVi art Kunix» notoe as l^s fmidP.mental tn*it an extiuordinaary pensirla/r^ 

The coritmporery aroistji , he writee^ donmna that we belJ.^ve ir noi:'^irii%tl at ve 

hop? for ^o^hliyr^KoA reepect riotbing and adr^dre uot-Mng» ^ccordiiv; to ther^ ^.here 

5 n TTSA 
ie rz)tVdix^ in Hfe >Ä>rüi ötrivli^g for ♦ihe conttniportvry litv^afi-ture/ Äcct^rtdnjgj te 

1ka\ro rejftjt» love ^hope oiie h^HldC 5ji the pa:t>greee of 3claice* Ihit lra:ux) i» p?\>ne 

to t^ öeae the cont aipoitiry peösiiiiisji ,incl¥lin^8 ite furJoiis attnck on tiie thf«r:r 

of pfc,rro9» , eil in eil only ae "an undoterrnined o5«:tioml cn>tbur8t '\ Hn^ooL 

liinvo ref.-re the :{hgRteRcnMk foonditiou of pi^sai^lam of tho cnntcr^por- 
ary U.tcratvre jja UG^^ on ono tide to the unclear acoi^iintam^e with phll/c»'^ri> .Ic*»! 
principloB, on the other aide ha jüacee it on acoount of the deaire f nr contjff'ta 




li: :ia:*t AÜ Its i?>heren^. law of ecioiloml of^.cr.c:j^ , '^Ts ovon rjoe« not 

Ä« CO f'lrd the Unk bßt.^.^ften p^'.at ^vrul por^üÄo, lx> llr»d T:hat fee/;rcr tl»e undai^tanding 
of the hist'^rlcal proccöaöi^wMeb ili# fii^r^tipi'o 'leöölviets" cilticiT^erl :>v hjuM refusad 

Pe8-dnl?T>r Imo aubruced all Uie bra!tc»iaii ^ii4 ra*<ti5fl of conte^-poit n" ^^HDurg^olii.. 

-■,■■'■■ ■ < 

cf -lirvix? ri^eticer edvantacjoB ccr^sieting in. ita lack of 4rii of loton^lÄ^cy» 

Kci^ ixon tc ih*i to^c^-rtfttion of the 3p.>o"(^tor bub a€f«er*vhal i^^* jET^ry ^.btr: et jdcttir^s. 

dar^t hkxkJ i»3' ai^cw^.rd gotjturtß, otoopin^,' pontu7X«, .nonotcnouS' *vtte?, üirjoonincodi» 
An:! yc* Vwtto refu^ree to ifr« Ir &11 thl« ijiCi»tjuri^ of persi^.isrf.sii an^r'hlnjß: oleo than 
tb*5 eryre3r5lcn of tii^ l/avr cf contiT;öt, ^ 

In It merelT :i reacjtion affainart ti>^ 5jd**Alt»ati^p oiMife, arx^ t^o deslre iv-. ^>io>.'' llf< 

In ,fcn«rt..l In eil is usrllne««^ petty rcti^hnofto .A.'jd c^isenchautnö»^;»» ilie J>'n:ß rlv^n 

aTKxl'T^'? ±3 ijrt fir&stiim in that rei«»vect thit .Vuiixr> Köa^xfetaßiaa: tho )>o35iion of 

«volation of art ^^ich he adopt» oon^i iore vcry cori^octly tha pros^-^^t Eta^:e a« 

a reriilar evt>luticr^'-jy ph.n^e in it» developricnt, ^It Uw cyor*.'5uplatlc')i of ^^.1. r.g 

{ ^jax-intry* poaitiva 
titod in art or.n provida , ^Jeaaani acoütt-tic «scp^^'lerco.tir the MJrrai-^rit^iivJxjnö 


of mif f ciri-Ug, humlliation «nd death cm sßtif^fy st.ix>ng tlrelrm r^-i^ ccutjlbut« 1x5 n br^ter 

kno^cl^a of llf6,theaa t^i^r,© fact meirl-t tho ^.ttenu^^n 01 art^ aeotliotio^ ^rid ynore^ity " 

( MXhc Fillure ffttory**^^« »loum.l of /eatiirrtica jl959^ vol^^'vll^ tb»3jP»;'70#) It follow» 

that th«4 posatftdatlö llt««tura «I00 oo'iSf^ü*^ ^x*m% v=ilu« /^iiioofar «.a it^ mhM 

inan_r«^« it j.{gng- pHyTX^4cal 

holrsr^TSott*!? U> *undoiiyUind blmeelf, it rm^^l« H*^ic^**^/9^^*'^^'"'-örfl of Kjja vhich 'f.' 

wäre ^u'niaHy ignored "by art* 'nd Iriasraach ^sayH tii<» .j.utlioi*i^i.v »1iqv3 iii^i^rpectedf 
di9a«!rf;er« ^nd dfy^tr'ctlon of hop«? ia iübe oi^ylli^st^ no^bTtp- sccieiy, tt i*-nd 
eall« fcx*tb t.^afacölr^^ of cornp&ijaidn or ii.di.ri>itior^ it (*ontriVut it' '^y that toVroi 
to progre« In a mtumliatlc concaption of niorala^ 




I \ 

'ITC cbos rox. sub^^oct to ctlticiac th^ fjoci^l order ik« of ohd cuipitüliat vR>rld^ Hl« 

ctuTc of lUo an otomal i^i-dar, not ßubject to any caan^-<ä3. Ir cr::-ductär;^ ^^a amlysils 
•oward the paychoj.oficia aspect xniro r«ifu«93 to ackiiov?'! tad^e that ^ihwt iT^-rit-'^'s 'i^\d«nt 

' ■ ■; i l • ~ ■ ■ '• . ■ :'; 

■ » ,„• J ,..■.. ■ . 


,■■■■■■•■■■ ' ■ . , ' < 

.gatiouii of botatr/ux>i3 3aHolarö .üjont ^iiaa V».I.Leni;> .mid bh^t if w® o^^ 7^j:h miloao]^ 

that a^tcx* scma tlae pes0iaifi»tic art will be ronlucrjd, by a/ioth^r oiia otj:rriapD po^iaeintisd 

depr«esioaß ^ük. upl^;:tirvTt^- er© prop^^r t<> «w?.ri^ ; our.t?dr.3 oC fdcU^ 3p«c;.al ciL.t:tiivfc.Uons 
oolleciai ia s^lisa« TOii<:ß rx>i- orly do vot ccai.rloute to tue umei^öUiAidxsiir rf tl© .&»3^eiic.0 
in Art^ on Iha contrary obsr.'^jrß ar*!; diitgrc. ;lri very cono^^pivoi' progroac^ 7ti^ 



'• in Jukts-pböition '. •' ':: . • '•' 

ment or art coi4 irntjiiuj t «i vdth ihe-^'ai-^st opncoptloni of profrosüi* -i^ aAliail^- 

in ' ^ 

the W.ole tfl7olutit>^iißt Uieory oT ir* ':>y 'iirkro prer-e^iLa itaalf a» a th^^ry o-^ urit.iccjitun« 

• . ■ ' • . f, . , ' ■ . ■■ , •- 

isw m^qp^JuatasskUKgik <imreL<x>p«i In tiie aub^ant j^ittax* of art.>iurü^ iö a^- r*'.ivj of *'th»"in- 

fluanti^l ctoract^r »f t^rxizt ii5«tli^:)ti36 " nniin oi'd«' to ah.ow tn« unfmiiXiiXüif^aa or tho 

popularity of* ax^gt nes^thrttd«»» ^ he ^ttiiV«ut«6 it to "the t^rtirioi^üiÄi-y ?t**crvC on 

•coao..iic rac^JorÄ^^the ho aajnrw that w»^:pybo/ty acKJiotflaciKraB xha iruportri.noo of ^heeo 

factoi-j , tae qu?.«tion iß orüy 'v to \hri% ^flCtcnt th# eoonocilc f^ctor inflacncaß tho 

dOTöloptaent of art" flhe ^I^nnast Th ocjry of .\r% iri9tojry:cioclo.«concinic de-':<drr:drd^3 ^-ni 

th« dial^ctlcal pxocase*' ,Tt^Q Joixr.Tial of Ä«athf»tlc«'«,l*0,voI^lÖ,:7o,i,p^431 )' 

Munro se« tii« xnaln f-B-olt of ovlcit ari; iu ila aih<«r«nco to riaa?.iör. un^i itd airdty 

to fonnalJLaa vhich according to Ida opirdon appears to bo "a loflcsal continua» 



tion of a hlütoxlcal -procuQQ oi' devclopmäat of art*« ( The Maradxit Taoory of rt, 

th.t chty for-ualistic ticnds (^^iistltutö tho last wozu of r>rogross in the fleld of 

ea,*ithotioö. Tli^ tntelloct^t* th« coilct «Äuixjrary cau ,he writ«», aas outf^rovni the 

'• ■ •• ' , ■ 

prlirJLtivö forma of mtunilistlu ropresentatlon. (He te^a in Eiiru r«^iiiii4t S,6h(itova)^) 

Htm ^>uea X3!« in r^llty the i*h c»r ©i^lcal pd^ltion of I-unro -/^jo oorrtinuouöly 
8trt4;;.ei* üdaf cbjsctlTlt/ ^üd lack of projudic« in ^JL» aptroadi to tm. ^inaiysi» of 

■ ■ ■ * 

Ärt> ".tiiiu^. ^;o>« by ]ai8 irnrcjatiga*s;ioiki onc«a vtiore th^t the scientific impai^^lality of 
th:i bourgÄoiHi öchoiat« isj Äcreüly a ciijäöufLig« mä cov«ili*g up U:.e oläss ccmt^ent of 
their ^tcnd* 1h o rai^rp jx>l«irlc^ of tho 07olu^loniMt Inimx) »in^nat uie crltlc« of 

Üic LiOEi of prorrert? ha3 proYoci to b^ riot <^\\ «Bcpd^esaion oi* oonfcmry vdöirpoiJit» but 

^oi*«i^ftncios ^ 

m<ftH>lir ba-^ parldüi ■Jj^fergrfr^iff'afcg witJ.iii *>ij« ^'iiwxliölo* r>oth of -hm aednlsxtx defond 

..the urijlxakatle slt'iiatf.o3A and the eterrait^y of tho iq « : ipd d Bi dr^ ^ aoeiaj. orter and 

aftcja* liaving l?^d sxt l/.to Üio jj^ptlblnm of/r©iid« Ijs^n ooftvFlarca» ^-tiiob l*«d Art 


a^y frau Utv^ pix>blaa3 of Üic lif « vf tho pjoiaa. Llko ovöi^t oTrrornönwr. of the id«a 

of pi-ocroi*^ ^ucli i.efcndors of it <:ij Tncit^io l^tiro iibodCsack «xriref« In frot one and +^.ho s«iat 
Vi«äu>üinl, t^e/ dnl^^ Uijc di.^^':tr^jr.: arnineant«, PiMi .2r;di.>g to itfiko rtnruliAtio/iaiy chanf^ee 
in JctäU.ctice 'inro i?3 fact : ep*3..t3 oidd b-j«irK«ois idirfWi abwt^tbe •i'^cisive iirr^rtance 
of füiiA in urt^Lho ^OLU'^'ea^r^cti^'ö expr^^-öirlty and tmticfM«t'..«fJn«öa *"<* realisw* 

-t fjociiij f-'inctiort of the *>volutioni^tic uö^th^ftic theoiy of Tnocacis 
MoiiLXi doerlt^- al"" h:-'»i anTUfHiOoö »^tocut tmientiXic oöjectlvity and "idiether ^<e like 
It» txial avxi ix^liv'icEl coi\L«ii^oncu« " ("Do th« arU errolveV^^ The ouirÄl of 
Aeethöticö, 1961,vo1.XT/, ^^cl.7f , p,4Ut lir^ ISjöacoaTe!^ rerultin?? fitia 

th« tiiJOiy Oi övolutirj}! of ait; ito ia ov^rt^or deatiaeo to i\if«tf-mrri tho »MMrrraoi^ie 
and itü atiooniimnist t^nH^tiCy dojs not tfsoape tiie author (lif tJu- dinoei'tation). 

'ÜAe aiiln thöaee of tite :i5; aert.^tion have buea oub3i»J)«id in \;iie contrtbntions: 
«The ßoci^vl eocence of :hf^ ae^thfttxcs of Ihowetii Kunro (/opn&sy Filosofü ,19635tTol2 ) 
«?Koiia;i liomro'* 'Vhilof^p^iSOÄLl .^qyclopt««a//ol»3, | » A Gritimta of Uie methodolofAcal 

iwi»»i — i I \0 • 

ri. rn.vai.iQhe Philosopfiie dsr Gegon^sart bietet ein eigsnartigeiä, 
ZUM 'J5U wia3.?spr-xa»vavoU*ja oüd. Obwohl öie buwuaat parteiaäusig oinge- 
stslli; tiiid »s«^-l;ja«*Ta38ft-5a 4« ifisolöglsütie Aia flln*.r "revolutionären" 
Qe5all-..2'ian«ordmng sein »oll, ist sie doch «&• ihr pbiiosopkische» 
Idicm enbelvngt» eebi- konsMvativ . sl« aUht der traaitlonollen Pbilo- Tisl Txilhey ele die eziatentiallatlscheu Hichtttagfit. ia rfeateuropa 
Oder> ßw.lj tischen ßiohtttugea im eagli&cLen Jpraüukroia, Jeaerdie« 
lu..t Elr, in der Sowjettmiori eine Veroioitung exlengt; wi« uo«ix nie ein« 
ptj.-or.o Chi sehe Rlohtang In der Philoaophiegeaohiohteüies icoiamt daher, 
dy.«l/^? ariiniSIagc der soBjetruäftlsohen StaataTerfaetiaug gü*ord«.a ist, 
c. cir-sr ät,iatap»il.losov>hi9,di9 ein« ähnllöhfe Secieatang einnimal: %l9 
eiu* vita^vtaraligion in den •■« » »öuat >-e]tanateß ätaatan dar Geeohlofite. 
üit <Y»ät,lioh5n Staaten mügea heate Laienatssten sein, d.h. sie ffexXtp.een 
SüaVrali'iU in Seotiän des aisabfcn» und dex Weltenschauung, der 3owjet- 
iXAjit li«xaft £ioii eaf den dialektieohen iLateriaiiamus oder 'A@xximv.9 
eil lim jUiloaopliiuche i.ehr«,äi9 der sowjetaiäon feusöoniiefsliot).« 
Giltutii höt. ItiTfi Zritit i3t. niott xui&saig.Tii^A »war anoh heute öicht. 

Wesai Äi«« yerpfiiohtonde Staatstheorie -also der i^arxiemus-Leniniaina« 
als pLiloaophiaofae Iheoiie euftritt.BO mau die Fhilccophle als solche 
ae^cBi'oPnd erweiterton Interenae« bilden.iAan muse die philo? ophisoh- 
eesühlohtllohen ^oraaaaet orangen der «arxistieohen Philoaophie kennen, ua 
«ia «u y^r.tehen ur.d man im« anoh his an einem gcwi.aen »-rade ^one 
Hiohtiagen k6unen,die .ie bektopfi.. l^an kann sie nicht einfach tot- 
«oh««igen. me-Literaiisierung" der ideoiogi^^onsn itolltingnahiaa niamt 
die pojim einer aolahsn Kenntnisnahme an, Man nlaat die Auöiehten der 
uegueu- lar i:oüntnia,m,n kritisiert sie n^id setat aioh mit ihnen an«einandei| 
andtaiJt aio wie vorher au ignorieren, llan erwähnt 8ie,am aie au wider- 
legeo oder au verarteilea. 

111^:^12 sclltt ^in 

In einem Auf^ata '^PhllcöOpiilo aaa irzlöhuug der jowjctju^ond'' erklärt 
dnr rt! «iich.3 Philo. op!?. \%A«Jt iia»i3i^g: Xu d^r üov^Jctanlo^i er?u.It der 
jn go ii5»aac5h ai•Jh^. nx? prai^tJiaoati üuiiuwaiöö^ö '^öondern auch eine Kennt- 
»1?:^ aeT Phllo;?iOi>iiii*^ Die üiriiiicitic Jrii^himgidio der jtmgii Ulf^nsoh erhi It 
er?o:^-f^t aaf c;^r Grnudlagc phlloeo'phiboaer K^nntnl©» ?lr befcraohten die 
i^J.ltäCphi^ cloht cila Intellcktuelidu Söitvertreib niüpiaigf»2f aei3tdr,v/lr 
brtreicht^an ßi« rieht nie Bcsitatuii dtti*5f»>iigf»n,die 5io 'teld/iaifc iin der 
'^•clfthelt ;Tlllr.ia llf<^i>ö^«^^le cln^n i'lx j<e?7i^<f»# ^^casch^n Tcrl^ehulkeneÄ 
(Jegeüi?t'it.e,*vlx V5yft'»h'$ti rhlloacptta öU e/oe *eltarjochatiimg*»uad Jeder^ 

nmr^ntiwnte ^oni «alur^ »TeltaudoK&nu^g haben« »te ellgemelnaa 
"b^ljrncjritan ^Ir dl« äC2lal\?iBd8n*.ohaft€ia ai^i/irrundlcgt dar Hiafateng der 
f;«9^^\iafih-ift5llohs^n 'M^viiolilaüa.Jjj^ d^r iüwjofcanion unt/de der ai^Btorlache 

^jid Blair?!: 'ilr^ahtf Mat^^lalis^iua ./irlloh öixi« Phiiosonhia der k'aaseA» Je tat 
l^t '^i.f^ iOTg'cttralo^i de« Land hohor iiliüoöopliisoher Ktilttir gcwordötit,'* 
l'an rJoat silEC ,i'a88 die rhilo;;opJii.^ in- x^öölaüd nooh ifio la der g^-tsn 
elt-?r. Üi'.it itiiio^;v<>li£j2eciiauang;il^tir6'^ibli# jjieB iat, Ale .^♦B* i\z eogllaohen 
Sprecl'lcroia uoofa Jcauia^ 

lü Kafcßiand ftieite die nillceoi^bi* ibtr i>el)tit rsptt- nfcjallch Im 
lü,*].rhxUty?i.i^cirt iu der Peraca des vrigori 3ito^oroda (1722-1794), ä^i daa 
Ko-'vr^n ^lu»e rn&.ftidoliea Jokra-tei» liei'ldeiaehntd|ala erotor a^^hr «^t^dtem&tlsobe 
rnaßi^^cti^r Pülloeoph gilt JBJotr 'ieohaadajew (1794-1986), ^en der dentaohe 
PJ\ili^aOiiii Sohoillng als elnan der bemerkenswerte at^n irecsohon boseloimete, 

ÄOTi^n &r je begegnet *^aTm raoüdadaie« Yerfasste In Vereint^nmimg ia L'or.kati 

i njae lae r?. rje^ ;?fli;cm 
iv?lriOfian iB^o-iasi elf " Philo öopaiaahe arleife^von dt^ncn/nur einer 1Ö36 er- 
geh -.Ow. , wo?* anf ?s)haadcjer i/on Amtrwegvn £»i:r Trphna innig «rJcltvrt wurde« 
J)ic Ä83.t«ob.Tlft-^dl« ite verölTfOÄtlialii Uatte, wurde rerbotea« Sacalood 
aell^at wurde tim Problem der rui^alaolien Philodopble^I^^aha&dajaii ^^ohllder* 
te da» Luad folgendenMaaen:" Zuerst brutale BarbaTol^dano. roiaer Aber- 
glvuuibc, döun grauüame erniedrigende Premdhcrraohaft^eln Oeiat^don alt 
dai^n unseren natioiialen Herraohern vererbte«'' J)er ru&al&ohe revolutionäre 

7or '^^'^"'^ 3^« ir uet title tey^ 
nlE der i^aoht exttaU a..d cb dica di? /fffw cfni.. r.- ^ . 

* ^t^^xu^i^ ^ueutist in £»;,.-el^erEbnr6: anf geführt, (i.t,i 
ähnlioh« a*uauktoa auuspracü vr.o der Brief ?'-ofiHB<^{.,1erB. 

S« i.« iüt Clc VcrhLltni.M. in kt.I..«rlioMcn^ be- 
«eiohn«nd.äa38 «o^av a*r :Jüt^rrich^ fir^ IMlo.oph?.-, aitf den T.x,^i. 
30h«n vnxveraiiiiteu rou 1026 U, 1363 ühr-!,t.up^; ..m .t^t3.,.fä.'ulUh 
Terboten und daua i.ia lass .ta.k oir,^-e3.irä-..vfe .var. Mno .lohtige 

J«ihrhTma.r« icaa« .utfalUa, ^aa aaf i.:a a,bi=t. It PWlo.ooIiia Jr^ 
öff nuioh. ward.. *a^ ala Litaraturkritii: od.r äsfeh.fciaoha Batraoh-. 
tung getarn.. DUa gil. ^a.^utli.!i vc:. ä.n 3ohrl«en d«, rcTOl^.tiont^on 
Demokraten ,xe d«r e.w^b.te aer«,u-aer in die ..l, gl..»- a,m. V^^^ 
Bakunl^f^Uoxai Iaohernyac.e..k,^,ii.^,i;^lv,l,_j DccrolJcbowTpie^ 
und anderen, "^-»^^m^k, ur.4 Dobxolia.ow ^ar.n 3öh^ ^ crt.cdo.,*/ 
Prleater/. M».. äÄj;, ,„^,^ ,,^ i.^,,3„_^^ ^^^ Vorlftaf.r doe i'« 
aohen i;eni.en. H I> niiua aner^nnt .:^d gawurdlgt.feohernj-.ohevaJcj -..^ 
auoh der Begründer der roraarxistioeUn aeuil.Uft^Jut. iecth^Ui: in 
Ruaaland. Me mel^teu aU.ev Uinticr .tuuäen -ter dem Uin-lnso Ref.ol«, 
namentlioh öea Unken nugöU der Jungk cge 11 ^.n.r ox.« dnnn unter Cemjc! 
nlgen Ludwig J^euerbaoüa. Taxe g6l.,tlee F.er2rinfS Wm«3 1. cl.o «erjrr.lgen 
Tcn Karl üarx und ihei^äiiah Sugei«, 

Be gab aber anob einen reoh'^en Flürel der Hee^lian/er In Huaaland 
die elawophll und antlwedtlloh waren und daa In auaaland BeateUende ^ 
im Hegelaohen Sinne Verngftlg" anaaban. H^ bieltea den .Veaten A\ 
"moraob" und die Buaaen «^aacbfolg« In der -Weltherrschaft und Lr 

• Ä ihnen gehörte der 

Begründer einer neuen Weltkultur 

Geohloh^sphilc-or.h J!l.koIai u^nile ::qj^j JZo'r qJ^ /OiTiäafer C37,'dli 3p'3ng. 

lera gelten >>mi* üT aah nämlloh die v^eicgesoalotite aioii!; ala gredllnig 

und evolution^ »eonasrn sila oiae Hoih« ron 2:nüXiöobc«n Ga^obea^in^In 

seinem Baoh^ "Ra^sl&nd und iiXu:opa*' fiö6ö) Dtfuaupt<»t «r ,d*?«'i •• 

12 Z'jkl^n von Zirill^Ätlonaxi gageiieu h^to, ai* In AulTbßU and ätrvi:fcur 

rerauUi-edonartig v^aron. Von ^Xmax 2;ivxHbairioi» jsur BÄfiKBis/wirfi viciü. 

die L©jLa!;tmß^nber nloht dl« ^^ebi^nsar^ uböxtrAgi^n^ l^Xo waoiac-n liuf^ 

blUhön kurx und ätarben^ L^l« romariisoh-^riävsniö^^h« ^tYliie^atlon hr3iti« 

di^rf.^wfrd abijr von nnsaland ereatst werdan. öpongl^r h^% dit rix^8n;4€>n 

cirt?>ehen ?*»ln«?n rid'3h3 SlTlllsfitionfsn tcfeärfor gefer^^nnt ali3 nc,nll5\?s:i5 ♦ 

'^tf dl« r'?.ö''.l'30hs ?hllcc.ephla als Find der d^^t^oh€?tt o^feischtet 

wer^*n k^nn^ so durfte auch das Konaept der aogfmannti«tt LGifcchh^it 

der ^«ötllobfn Haltiup der dotit;johen Jäegtiffawelfi entnoriaen uud i^rr ruael 

ii(ihi^>ri ^f»brauoh adjustiert worden ?3# in, hielt; doch D3r«itft l^ioi;ti? lu :3.0n 

al« '^le des ^^ectc-rui^r meint«» auch i*wH>k,da3ö i^^/iöons^an und Ciliar al:i5 33p 
hab^'n ohne 3^^elf«l glctohbedeutend »ni« iSoioaa Anaiotiteri ö»!>rurisn frol*- 
Höh ivif uralten ^-^«berllefarung??»^ 

^tiropälttohe Statur «rr^iahten öoiohe rufisiboh« I^enkeap -Jiie 
iäi)colci FjodoroTif(ia2B-190;5)y der u»b*?r ö-iöonle^aUtlloJ^keiit philciiopfclo- 
rendc Wacalli il08anoif?( (iö5 6-1910 )^ der A»;7Qi»ijtör if*lÄdlir*ix ^oiO!?jo«i? 
(1863-1900), aach iiikolal Bexdiajew (1ÄV4-Iö4di, der ur;^priinfelich 
M-^-rrlst wsr,3ioli dann ol^ Ouriatlicticr Kiatexitieliii-t nnd apir5.tx;alist 
dfiklarlort«! nrd mit atwa 100 sxcMfn btirgcrllohea PLiloaophan n^oh 
dem Sli^g dar lioiisiiCLil&tl&ohen ReTClution In die Bmi^radon «ring wi^ no 
rJcle HtTftcdn vor Ihnan^ Ab^r weder diene bUrperlfoben '^^llceophen neoh .die 
kcr^tr-^tlrr^n aiawopMJen bub^n eintn Blnfl.nee nri" die rneeleohe ötgipn- 
wtirt^philof^ophi« pcwlnren köimen^eondern die revolutionären Deiiiokrauen 
ftnö oer Liltte t^6ö 10 •%^alir hunder ta und di^nn die ^nhlüAger von Karl *^arx* 



ÜB ieti rwidi flir die ruoaiachs i)enl:v«'eise Uberaaa beiseiohmixid^dMeJii ßeiaäe 

Äi^ mett^rialisliiaoUa Anthropologie Lndwig Jreuerbaoh» 

i^Ina anaera Porüi dea Materiaiiamu€ -n^aioli dor :.iarxlÄ In Haas- 
lan^ ^Inetj solchen lifliafiuss eriaiag^a xonnt^t^t^'Ä ^v'ar clifs gsi^iijätraaiBen 
^or ruxö.ii:!ille?-''ae der v^yjaslxiaug der .ru-4alÄ0i46n Oogenmir*« In tiaduren 
slewlöchÄH Ländörn,z»JB# In i?olöa geaial^et^ :Lioh ilic Hi^gulaohe Phllcso- 
ptle/nioJitr la ^töxialiafaTZö|Uon4©rn. ir* fr^i^ou thei^^ti schön ai^irifeuallsti- 

Der Marxlaimia griff um aloh la Rtteslciid in ü^n vi«3uiiÄig3r Jahren 

d4j| Xe,Jahifhtmdö3*ti8 taad gewann dort «froliioh nioht auf dea '^'alxratühlen 

ä%x PhlloECphi'?,iicnd$4rn mitar frcinn äohriftiteller latiu iCheoratiker 

rl« In iifK«*^*^^l^h«>'^ öuropäi^ehen Icmd -rielleloht lalt AatrUahme I>etttaoh* 

Ip.'nfto* Ab^r öuin Jchlokaal gestaltett sica in in Saoöiaad gaus ^ißdtra« 

In I>t>ty.tjQlilaad «ritdMaud'sin när^illoii uaah iaa«rliaru dejp^,öo:iiald©tBOl5:ratji- 

30*i^n Piiartel^ die eia max^xiitifeiOtio» ^'XQgr&aiLi axu' ^ ^ » '»^^mi gu/^^a ^dle 

dor '^ 

^In AbrUc2::eu rott/^^^^V^^^^H^^^^^ Ideologie dea dialektlsali^n Uate?la<» 

Henna ron ^iy:?c nad Ktigcla k9ani:<eic!iaiJtQ# Xiisi gSc3oh/ih aoah 1<??s Tcdg 
von Pr iedrlch Hugelö (1820-1896 )p '^M ar: r,wci ^'alirof Jüxi^jor war ala 
l'tvX ^^^.rrdBlS-ierz) ihu la« 12 Jahr« Ubörlotta^ äolche t^o^i^xldomokra- 
tlf*eh€ Part^iuiltßlicdar wie Maard ^«jcn&telu isardau SeilkantSmcr ^ 
w5hrf»ad nenikantlcniacha i^hllcuophon v^ic Hexiaßiia Ocheu und Karl \rorläa- 
der ^.^^T DOßlaldciÄokratlaohoa Partoi b^itys^toa^Ia Coateireich a'itierta 
^\oh ffrl^drloh Idl^r dCia l'Oöltivl^iaao and i;mx>iriok4.i\iii;iBmub ron 
flaob '^xt ATaiUiTlUtf nad raan bi)ijLt,uptel»tit daiiaXb ia sC)£&&liätit;ohea 
rroitiön,ä£Vk a odaard Stach fUr die i?öttuwift;öeutühafteß ua2 geleiiitttt 
bft ??a^ :^arl i.'lar^c für die So^lalwläStfindohaftca« Aadar« SoalÄldemokraten 
\?'e l'<gviiii Mt;rck,c*r v?af:reau d^ft Natiouniboijiall^auft aecL /^jutilka 
ar?f^f'Pijclf»rue> ^ wui'det: Ileuhcgcliea^r aud ein aadtrar ao»lall^vtlsohor 
Thcori^tlk^r F^tI reutt^ky -der bchiuiöoheu UrsprurigB war^beh&upiete^ 
tt ir^ti fli ^'1^ ^c:f2:eiane des Irol^tarlatB gl9iohguItig|Wio &l6 

^hilosopiii^oh icgri^^ei ..rde-n>eterxaiißil.oh.kantlaoh od.r ciiri.b- 

2T1 dtu ^i^^^ii ?^eor(tUic.>fu .16;. kc^:dei^f^ In Racslanfl gehört« 
(Ja30.i.h.*aa.'faßüvr.(f trat, ex lä9S sou-oi.:. ^.g.n den .1« 
ImXtir» i»0a ar30^1«a a-m BuoU "Sis fmd^^eot^alac Fragen des aar:sl.- 


J,%en « .b« .edet Ir. solo« ^» noch i.. .a..x ^ ^««r^ 
,eoHt«Thleit.«.ud.rr. ^csonnfr.rA« Motive In ihn «ivoftth.t,.. AuiT eer 
«.««• a«« l^.uuU 20,Jahrh^.dert.. mohteu s5ch auch ttrt.r u.n 
««h-n 3o«ielda«olcTai:« ähnlloh. Bev,e^.-t. b« .5.. .n... den 
ö«ut«ohatt. Sie bischer, .n de. ^•terlBli.^UB vc« r...,:«u ihu d.rch 

(geboren 187»), der iu dea Jahren 1904-7 »a daa .mr. 

^Xi.ohe« »raiiUoa {d.n, dor EehrUeitariobUn-^) da. .uaaisou.n io.lal- 

de^,ol:ret« geh5rte.(BiB I90ö,ü.a. oi. .a. er.t«:. r..«>i .;a.olu. 

tlon .aren Parteien iii imB^^lr^d ütarh.urt T«.bctca). 

Br nanr.f a-i^e .Ucb.t«nr,dle «lue Ab«uadlang dcrf^nlg^u vcix Uach md 

A^en^iu» «ar^ala .rapi..lo.o«la^«..^r ...f dau ^r.i.nnx« vox-.äa«« e, 

Vl^Tlns^. H.6S1» belt,ehl.l* o^d 4ai.«.' .i'^« :.lstarlV.«l>^ ^U«^. ^r ging 

,a .mer • oigc-ntUcucc :^r.i.>m.« völlig fxaM.n 

Bichtung U.OX und .«U. .on d«r .a.ux ^oh. ci.« '^^^;;^ "^^ ''' 

Ansieht d,rat^« Ua.ur«i..ouaoU^'t ^utayra.ti. 2r »tatte iriol, 
Anhänger wie a.u .pätar«v .raten tusalsaaon TclI.^^'nl.aaT fix Tolka- 
..mär^ng na., der Olctoberrarolntion von 1917. d.n Aaat'.etivcr 
nnd K»lt5i:er Anntol Lnnat.oU«.«:^.*«« f«-' Br.eto..Jn.olU.e.itaoh 
nna .nAa*a.«it denen .r 1904-. eine .eihe v.. 3üoh«rn .erö.fen.llchta. 

Hier ^Tiff :)tm ..enln ( Vladi.dr Olja^ow .1670-1924) 

, •. V -,-«. 1. MA ni.-.o rczh vor doir. Tode von iSagels ,l).3som;£-n b«tta 
kelt; bereits lüV4,ai.t.o r.^-^ v^^* 

defser r c 1 criJir * bedrohtt . ..r .icuv..o 
griff e*i2;'»Ti Eosäano^T »aber aaoti gegen -tu-iu»* 
' " . . « ,. .,.19-18 sccü-n die Lcbrer. Tcn '^iOb dud Avenariuß im 

3U03C "llat-erisil-aac aad uuipirlckj itiBi»*i.iB 

... -h ivi 1»»... al'^o die Sofeht eiu«o HHoifaia la oen 

., , '.* Ty»fc«',*tfti^i*»^o'tK ass lii»tovlaoU«a llst-^iiailswu« 

.4 .'i^.»o».v-.r. •=>i'j -'ir tuia absi dl« i}«6eil- 
^ „.. ,T,o ^^^v p-iniat dar Hcalitlit, 3ie GödÄrfian, 

«19 olotv die ttsnaübtsn sL-irubcs «sa*f^,»in" -•« 


T,ancccrW'.che?.ct«Jflailacxu8, ««i &»« i-u3-i. 

... -^It -^niieöt und daher aiai fclr-''i-''^-iS t>«tia^pt»n 

nuHS.daes «ii l--t;ar.3c aind das .«^a^an a« -l- , 

- in der Ufl.rzso'ji9ti jjonre 

der «rl.«nnttil;.t;hocretlaohe 3a.%liinritJ.üer 

nnd ..i Lenin ni. d.. üa..riali^a. verach.oI.m eraoU.lnt. l^i. -It 

B«n " wlo de* "Id.iAllHPtu«' beatiap^c«. laan -juhs 

- HT« , 'v,a'' '■Pint.riöl ai-niiohe yoimotHtiorxon aat.oÄ h..nd2lt 

- , -.t ;. «.1 <"• Art u.d die Sr«n«8n tmaMer «rkonntrJ-a, 


niolit; ttt: Oesinrmngftn, 


Lonin«. T):J h-.t.f ibßifi ge.^su don 'IdeaHamus' «urdon zum Vcrblli 
asr ^n^inv ,1er api.te.en •^hilopqphi.u in der iowjstuüioü ßo^aa ^1, 

«0 ana-rturonlntisoh ,w«il ee voa ü«,r VeisUiu^iua« äe* l^züu^u^ auf 

hie- Jei>ells,.us- Bicht m*.hr in. Mittelpunkt; phUc^ophiaok«^' öi^ku^^ion 

"-i-e£ ^ufaißR tir^ drei Beßtendf.eil« d«ö -cu-ii3mua" ,£örav* "Mo 

li2y/ao uüd 1933 7«!(}ffenUloht. tia aiig«;uvjiu«a uat; iocia äio srii^nat- 

ihn ttiüht aui- voit pülluHopiilaahen IdesliaBui, ä,h, in d«r tJat voa 
•rjj:öm.tal8theoretiaoh9n Nlhilir»rrt?s urd S>«fetisisruus s^gefex^aat, 
•onfi**u Überhaupt ^'o^./l?:«^ Jc^^en -Ih.orien.dic «ie di« ieiu-e Z^U 

liü^&h^^^gchcnistiE^^ .»anterlali*^,^ keine ^ x^^^yL^M do^cUA 


• •-'•kr «i^. 

rn2 in i« " Mä i öivik" üiöd«xg6i«igB, 
ifealin ätt38«ri;e sloh über t^uin i'oig*,uaei-i*üÄ«u. lulx glanT^e, 
ieuin fügt« sra Marxiam» k-Jlne uau«u üru^asü^a« üinau gent-uco wie 
er auoh keinen e3.fc«n armideet« aad«i:tie.ür iat dox *ou&o.,auni.^it.3 
{Joaüiar von üarx a^d Angela „über er war niuhc nui' «iu i .rt ^^^ '^ 
'^'ix -HSüre von Marx-^Jagela, sondern gl^ioiiiieiU^ iiir i?Oi öaeiia^^s... 
er aucwioic^lte 3le weiser, .m.d *aiifc« ^i« ^^^ ^,^^ ^5.viofclang3- 
lifdinguagen aa.,aüiaiiaa dar raase dea Iiaj^eiialla^ua,..^ tro« aa 
ihr eüwaa bei ii^TorgieiaH "i^/<rba,«6« in der voriiaparialistieohan 




Parlodo das Kspltnllörnns gegeben aein konnU» • Hier spielt Stalin 

auf dlo Tint&aoiie aa^daaa Lenin dfis Seltrilt^Y dne er«ten Weltkriegs als 
die Veri^aiiaporiodö dap Kapltallamuögöl^ aie ^eriod© Impwlnlletlaohor 
Kriege aiiffaastip und dÄdaroh auaa alle krißggffJ^renden Staaten des 
Wostanü auaanniiön Eilt i^euteauland/In^lneu Topf warf^waa fUr die Benrtel- 
lurig der Zriöeöaoiiaidfraga ron vJicfjtigkelt war, Stalin moint weit er ^ 
daSB Aas Heuö^^das Lenin aur iSahatakaMnior des üarxlamne beitrug ^roll 
md groia auf den Äx^undlugen von Llarx und Bngela beruhte «»»In diese?« Sinne 
sprioiit iiiau bei uns (d#h. in Hutialand)TOiu Leninlaraus als Itorxlamma In der 
Bpocbe des Imperiali ßmus uiid der proletarlsohen ReTolutlonen^** 

Stalin (Joslf WlsaarlonowltMh Ds^ht?g^ac^.^lli^{ie79-19r?) ^vtr ^-jüi nerm 

Jahre Jünger als Lenin ♦ Kr trat 1913 mit einem kvt^B^iz »' larxisuus ^xnd 

nationale Frage " auf den Elan^das Lenins Beifall eraUita.Iti dl3.:3m 

lieferte er eine in SOfJetrnseland berüJrata Dfflnltlon cirier 'iistloa'; 

yAnn Hntlon Ist eine hlptorleoh jMisl'uiiiliaii'ni sta^lla 3^ra'iir.aoli,.ft 
von menbotiöu ^öut standen auf der örmdlage ^•x Oemelncohaft der 
Sprnoh'i ,d«t5i *e^rltorinm?,des '^Irtsc^hnftnlBlti-jna lod aor aian in 
der GrOßieinaoti&ft a^x IialticX offenbarenden payohlsohen Wesensart # 

Diese D^flnlrion war v,ioht.ig mit H'dckeicht attf t^n Nr tlonalltätenohar akter 
des rusßiaohen Eelah^JStdaE In den Soi^rjctstaat ningeblldet vmrde. -*e4n ^ ^^-^/>^ 
let»tesV>eliandelte dl© Tlieoric der aprache^'^rt/Pührte atta^daßs die Sprache 
als eilgemeinea Veretäadiguugaiulttel ^^^^^^^e^^.^^^J^JV J«.»J^^^^ 
üeberbaoe eei»x)iei einaelaen tipra^^n ßt.i©n also taxiltenÄbereohtigt. 
Seine wiciitig&ie ciChxift «Ueber dialektischen und hiötorisohen Materialiönus*» 
faeöt lapidar desaen Grü.ndsutÄe gueßrmen^insboaondcrs diejenigen der Dia- 
lektik, wie öie Angela XKUbüCKKta nugearbeitet hottem, obwohl die örtindlagen 
auf Högel isurOokgeaen, der in meiner ''Loglk^^'beBaupFet^alle Dinge; seien 
an siüh wider apruohliohaj^^Jfx iTeiiii<ii.^f) es ßioh hauptsächlich «^Wlder- 
sprUoiie in der Josellechfift »migela aaoh um Widersprüche in der Hatur^>v » 
Lenin reülpicrts Ale» i.t.>hräa beider« 3talln erklärt) : Die dialektische 
Methode •t'^^Jiii'' iahtet iän i-j^oÄcda ler Jntwloklung von Hledrlgeren aum 


Hoher tu iiioiu. rii« ^inö hariiioaldohrt Jntf al wUxig .•.ÄCxidcrn bIb eine i;iit- 

hiillruig d.^jr vifierL\;:^rvloii^ in :yins^>i tiid ir^v^heinmi^en, p1^. f. inen ''XaiLpf^ 

entgi??au^t-jefrrtJ;r T€Udeiirpn,dlf; «tu i.uf ricr iirunai^g«>r.ör "iJ'rrdprüoh« 
v/lrkaaci öiutt^ 

aaf g*öör»ll?r.cti5iftlicb© H^.fc?;lo;rlurip er;'Ä#nd$t,Äaf fi!^ -iolcei«^ gu.iiylü, enthält 

Jlagaii?^ biß ^u ö^iner ^igonerx aaf a.tti; ^aoielsö der 3mt«?rl'iM ^itl:5a':;en PtilXo- 

den Mr.2»x.lrteti Äfi .■!'■[ 114 ur in uolner BnoLe "XsterirvLianiua i:fnf^, *^i^pi:( io^roti- 
sleü^nft t^lr"3 l^I:Äölt^if?n KritiZ actsrscgsn hat.iohon ünpels habe bsbaoptotg 
d&i?£ "Änr ^"»itfrieli^rijae nacti Joder sieuen grce.seÄ i2afcc'«c]iat».£: eln«^ scuf 

Scob äi3 LehzS^iijeti, üenlnc ^nb^'F tU'St r«:3at OMali aein^JK ^od-a aiöd u>tn* 

neigten -iu^n uiG-Uztlaohen Id^aliarftas« I)t*:30 AiJwelohinngrtn T^TTtrtjfsllt?? 
Stalin yÄC» CRöc celt ©twfi 1921 die PhllO:^.ovti« <^«3 difiloV^.i..3^!ion 
Mat^ar'alicirt^ue naoh %?x-^r»föl3-Leriin xallaiii^^ier^^ch^m^ wtrits* l^loo v#ar 
wohl dÄ» ^ri it-^^llnsjdoofi änderte slo^j hlsrl^j ölohta ' (*s'>a'siJ.iO;xeb aioi 

Diä2ii>lir*fcn elnor g«wi:ASffn 'Vandlmig antarIÖrg«i« 

Betrachtet man uuu daa /'erk von I^rin aud ->tfaio 'md rU-j^nigo 

der Urüigen rasiiiiiohen ivoiLn.ent6Voren,G10i^sfitoren uud rUMnriirt.orcn ,<!ir* 

all« mit -.cum und oteito beWiiBl«m.<« sie trau dea-'ill.-^silfcrn" ürrx -^na 

Uno..!;» . i€- iMWe -'^HÜ» M» Phllo&ophl« bohpnaflt hr.jipo.flo erplfeb eich 
Bng«l3 uit j^w« '^^^•> ^ i- ^^^ gabiui»i!^^ 

tin höoha iMrlL*ürdU«» iiid .wetn man Ä«» ürirtf ^•^'-(CVbelt mit ibrt« 
Dtbild ,«gI«loht. i^i i^t «au In den Züg.n .ine. fünfjährigen 

""wfe'"^""^'^"'"' ™*' ^^"^'^ ^rwnc^sensn .lann oder in deaaen 


^chniicnJBLv^tonL raii; hinein 

'^r^^ie üaohen wurde» 

Ü8 wurde hUr au Txoi an.ijo.trU.wfe,.3rgarx.t,dass mn den i^arn aua äi.aam 
Gestrüpp üv-raa^xa^bDa z«a..>. i)ia !iaupl;,.^o?ill3hen Lator«a von wwarx- 
sein hla.cri...« ^..1...laU..:.-^i. «K«pU«r .H?)4?%1^5^.e. 

kapUalUtisoLeu ^>e.elUchaft, l^i^et nnn .ort ctv^^as ^^^^''t::^^,^ 
wi« d»ia LYasühlagcn üer •yx.^ixr^ i„ -nnMtßt o^ar Ton cler »«gafiioa d« 
«•gawiüü uhd au«ercu ii« GrundeÄnJ« griffen ai,*,,, ^rt^ 
die ^g«i,. aus üögei iOhüpi:te,;,i€ .'nateri«U6l;1,soh nniicr.iapaiU u:ia aX^ ^ 
Im -Änui-J)üiu'ing" - - - -- - |_miii|ia Y - ^ i if j^""^^ ^u ,«i„^„ 

naohd^t üic^obarravola-iloa von 1<^17 al« "Mnlelcti^ d«r iia^ar ' haraa.^^e^ 
iÄ^öüÄüso A-ie aiö isa uir-;^«agr(jica«»ü SgoftUea von ü»rl liaxx v^arü- 
öffenciioatea, iiisa ccg p;iilol..gtöeh T^rdieaBtiiöü uaä tu.- die ^^ütwiok- 
luog voauarx iuU-rtßßarit s.iu^tt^r offenbar üet äir.rx uiokt aXL* Gfefiaaken. 
die er in cieiüär Ju^seuu uattf, ayttcr bribaoaife»,ß.A*tmUoh >;ard»A uos 
Täi-exa»9it6ü A*.u;.aci;.iut;ea/sri'.ri.icUfln ^8meri:»mg«B a«r "W.a»«ik«* u*f 
Maixiama«^ «iub »aagawaoüaaa» östftovlsatie l'aeorie aa8ß.miuangr^ 
Die erst* At;ä6atver»öuii-l5ar.s rollacg r^oofi .ucnln,*.!. er iu* -itoteriaxismua 
«nd .impirlokxili^i.vm^- Oas Haupt ^^nv/loüt auf di* Srkennm.uheorie 
Tflriegt«.Ä.i»x aaiae Motivs werea polltlicher Hatuv.äanu er w«r keia 
polltlalerendejf l^ail jcpb son.l?»rn «»In phil-sephJerender Politlüef, 
Und ein f?l«toh*» gilt noch in vi«! höherem «saa» von Stalin, jj« ,«»« 
aohon riobvig sein.v^es uniimg>-;t fin einer RnchposprsohauK toik 2ö.jüöaeiuber 
1960) Henry L.Ho&ertt.Ue? Pirekl-ur de» «institate oa 5aat ü«.ntr«a. iau^-ope- 
»n der üoluBuia Univeralt^t in Hew rork behauptete: Leniu eoüeiui *ine 
Jener aelüecen ai-tcrlaaheQ (Jeetfilten an «ein, auf die a^m wie auX üapo- 


leöa u d 3iomaroiC ii^any wieddi' ^ ?u*a Jk^Oiisuiiv \iAd die r^n iimn^r wieder 

Hol!« aj-a pUüwdOpiiioOhar 'JUwoin e:»l^ct »asu.soür^ilirÄ^ /nr^h ai^^s vdrd 
lu uooti viel iiöaJi'^ri -^aßae kiJX ^h^llxx zixtx^j!!£^ti^ 

vrevadt? wi'göi* aar ^oliiii.ah;;^ atpi.lUi*i.g von ier^lr ttnd rtriln 

Txnd politisioäer; i^uhc^ni d^ö -^artd^ja^L^nil^ na*? der M^^n^t^dr 3c6 Mrrjciamu« 
flntrßeltß wuräa die ^f.eiluri^~ der rhiio^riohlp 1a -iv?s!/lrr.f rl^-I >'»innaas- 

duroh «In pnrt«la^^slgffs>poIltlrtoh«e,Bl-ßc «liJ^^eltlsefi Orrileht,,»!«« 
eoiiOÄ daswog^Äidaae i^eniia ötn arurdaat« lea'^Pert^il lohllttit* fOx ;^:e 

aein, nämUah d»a;a p «eno sie äeu ^te&dF^nkt dtr ArfcirUirXlH.'t«^ slct 
attis ifirlgoü inaaht*l/topBrfc«iiiohLk<iiit ist ulc^t ?-ur «i%?<! ^ur^-^tlic??!* ld»#^ 
«Indern prauitiBob tiuduioätubrtai', Ä^«il :iUe U ?I«»nt«rX ^^or TTöpert^Ulichk^lt 
Ihie eigenou laterööftöu Yerxclg^^j, i^'^i^Lg^kciiül^ei «rbtr^btciti dio meisfeija 
Phüc topUcn ClBX ¥!9Xgangt»ii-ufeii* <^iao cbJGkti?© Philoaop^it«« 

tragetidari Pfeiler dca Mtjrxii»iüua-j:icuixiir,aa& goisaoht und dle^Äea Gr^inö- 
thMt besteht iu d^r AuufUnae^dfefi^ di^ .' ivlTkllcsh nnri xc^ i;.t;d&a9 
ftld aioiat «in '»ebiide ixiAt^^Xh^ '40x utQllMJuH l^ti Kic ^tv/a Sohcpenta^r:r 
und Ändor« '»IdeaU^t^ü'' atumiito^atfUr ulc die w«lt aur X^evX nioht r^al 
4a TTas'^Ita'^^ 3^'^ln vo? Densen güihtj^liat uooh lUictr. in ^f^r TTrih^hrtui^ Toa 

ercr^berder^ 1?tieM iwt <il^ weitere )3(3fiauptnng ,1i^ii <lr ttJ^w 

txistliirt^abiir wir wlasan ano'i^wl^ all bcarta^ffen Ifct. Sie ist 
kelu UMTkannbarai Diag an aloh^Sa gibt in dlaaar Phiioaopfciie kein 

kein veiöc»lxlbleit6& l^ilc: za «ai&#i;iü Ttlv. eicht vXn Deuigebilü^^^i^ondc-: 


autKx£ I^eutctii eiu aocl^akt ait «uat »ilo ^aru.c telti die 'relterkennt ^ 

aiö .rieBfe ..tköuatrAft ist S'^iar rUJgXioh iix^'i \;lrklic;i,e>5^r nlobt vollkorA- 

mea^^i«? «nt^riaji.ftit. Aiaä lix. ia-^ dos i?i^iußUöoh5it'tilGlj«'n Ifortachxitta^ 

Ir] Ihrer Uöb^rKoa^Xii^ roti d^x 

de:^ Vk^yttik riahtig üoiau« iX^T ^JxasschlUo;^ drr ileaIi>tir,ohcu Hiiloaophca 
dt»:«' \'i\jli Wtt*ö,üht^u ...oua^n: ai- oiüc ichcidcwand , die 'cm^: tot. der ^'^«It 

LXu WitkiiohkiJlt^aur Uon&cJi &iiid körperlich, abo:c di9»€? l!.()r-::j«ärllTiik8lt 
hat TX'öiI« iäJLtwiC'kluaiäaäa^adi ui*,d orxaioht iia ac;!ilriar.P';>arat di^: 'l? i^n^iohxxft 

dlt Welt «u i;!id*r*i'ieg»lii# l^i^^s ii.-^ f-.iuö m.türilc.ti* i7.d »Li^.riöiö.'i :/lts6ii- 

• in« noo>i ^4ia andsr^ iat^Bortairn daruH: d«c enlmlstiBOfti^n Tendenii^ia der 

« dl«»nt der tierrsoMadea i.l^.B^o ^indey^ ex' Cle AxitmzryAerx^it 4;*r a^ rlonton, Meö li?t d^md^joti f>in^ ^tia.^ntx'^sr di^fi Lsrlnp^K'^a 

Ml. &ruude»tÄ der l;ieilektll: it^ der ;Jt*.iIlÄ«5chen rormuli arirg 
ICLutet öehln^drhB allii i^xecheiimrp^r. einander b.^dlnRen iL^d asgs e» ia 
«W S^tur kf^ine Ir. oller tt^ii Ge^2:epatc.nde glDt,Vl?lnöhr befind^^n sie sloh in 

ntttidipfti ;i*cUb«ltPie rdngen euUilokeln olch und ctrrbcn Dh^T^fTict lött 


As. AI*, »b. Sie dial«.tUoh« ^.thode ai*ht di. Dlag. in andauernder 
Bntwio.lang,uud «.ar ao.da*» die ^aturer.o.einungen icleine. 
uuanB..alio.. «andiungea aa.cU^o.ea, di. i....r sr.«-t and^ 
«erden, u« dann pl...Ua. vo. .Xo.. .«* ..elita.ive. 
..«.utllCe '^terschieae .n.uBO.I.g«u.Xde.B .ind ^.he Sprime« von .Inem 

. ^ „«H^rsn Diese» I^iPKip ö«8 Uffischlages» Tcn '.uer.tität 
7.«8tRnd in den anderen, iJieae» ^^-^^ f 

In Qualität. da» den ganaen sntwlokiungRi orp. ne 

^ . -.-,«. •.« T?Tiecrloh :<ngcl8 U^.-morB-.^n nr;4 btlöot einen 

der trpjreoaeo Pfeiler üer aai "»^ 

»ohea Batur, ro* Tiere »ua^u.^ou «- 

> V - 1 " .^tlnt- Phiio-iürale ris'toiitinui- 

.^^f-r^ nflnirt U3rtl^ taten eohofft^n > o »tx 
tat. Hie 3l«1t lä»st die Bewegung aceta nan« „J.«.-T;<.^en 

einer ^tcte höherer. Stufe foitt-ohrciten. -'^n J.mng.n m 

. .. V 'r ri«r ^3eli?o'^aftlloh9ti int*lokiang,-nf als»« 

-.< i ,- .-fe-i .(-h«n 'sSat-rlrili 'Tüll» Haupts äcjhlioh •:^n, 
küui'.at, e» naturalen aeiu aiti'.* .-«a».. 

wutoöi die ^atur öe^i.a«rmaa^ezi ae.9 vor^xersU . ^ 

d«x rfirKi.i>>Ui'-öit. x.H-i». 

^ .„, ... -.U.»pra«'. .1. U,l.«« ^.^^>" »»'.•■' ''^-'' """- 

. •-. ^*. ■v.t-.l-t'utK in'.mfci' nc-13 9 st-A Rurigen acitigt, 

deswegen be»teüeu,w»i.i die u^x.0i^i^^^'b ^ 

. • . i-. > uu.Df li<"aeu.--^- ^-*'*^*^-* '^^'^^ '^"^^ "'''^* «-iBCüen 


Harmonl«, sondern Xampf al» den urtprUngilotion Zustand . Die Slnheit der 
OegeuB&t»e,or,gt. Lenin.lst bedingt, Beitwtilig, vergänglich, relativ, 

ihr Efj^pir i£t t-baclut vric die J^evöirtaig ucä die i^ntniolciuofj.Alle Anpftsaungen 
eind/eekuridaro ur^oiiciwin^en» .iüiylt l.->i: aelt>v«lUg,i.aaii»f «»«Ig, 

Vtej) i'ri.idrioli ■f.i'iö'-'la aa "Widfirspr-iOiiöU' ia u^i ;.atxr 3:iii» 

?an4 - -> * 1«OÄ.t,tr,ilrvri: öaer.f&ii.'4 ia dar ■^^e^^Uaoiiaft tmd iti der soaxaXen ^%tvt]r- 

tut, «ä ia- eicaioh-Oie.üasa .'Olotia An30h9-inTi?r«n Lenins prai'ei&alie 7cr^5Uge- 
veis« toeeinflusBön ciueetc, -Jai« Htf.ah?lnttng nr.tsrlle?t irn tampr fsr Gsgen- 
•tt»e,ai« wlra fi'ufier oder -pWer «arprSPTf, ^brr ülreo Sügotiyf. wird 
dann ebenfalls '^ntgiäifc" ,^ eins «rl. ^ttc.l;.^9hr anr. PrüherfU .»rfolct, 
al>ex nictt nii gisioüÄr ,;:o.x'.crn saf hüh--r^r 3tnfe. Jica ist .-ir ^.oeoiuiinie 
"Begatiun der i-" , aiu.- Varallgeaclusrang, die a<ii;t*ls äc^iaTtaia asr 
*iegelsoH<5n .PHilobCi-aü«u Uad «ie iu «in* x^t. aj-iyei^ei« gUltj.K'*;» 
latnrgeaetr«t hat. Jle ifntTticirlKr.g .arüläit .»nia, wioiorholi: 
die öT7röh-p.chtcu Stia><5r ;-uf oin-r i..".!!**«« üxaa,«!? 'isl: sozrviueon 
die (^fs'.tal-. «■iri.^x ;ä:vlxale ,Rl.cÄt filn*?? Cr^rafion. Sic <?ifol^t; d-ioh in ;?psütt- 
gen, c=a i^Vj'^ ai'w govüa.'äarm.-.aftn Jt^t^^stropKauftrlig« iJatexbrectians-'ri d^v 
Kantiauitii/J, r'^voiuülan^ra Xonvil«. tonen, da« üEsoiuaö'cu der ,i3,,ti5itj'it in 
die tuuxituüi at« iiinjrsn anfeAiumuDgsi-pulse.di» ecr. d«ri Wiaeraptüohoa 
folgern, aus dea .u^amruanprall d«r a:.t3rso!ii" -.llohcß Kitrte rrd Tfr.öen- 
len, wolcihs in äeü ..i i^üsiöaüSöii oder iu der Geisli-i-cUti-Ti wiriccn,- 
Diosö .'-ialaitli aer .oifu'iwegu^-g SötBtö ..enin cor f,'t\-Jinlioh6n i:nt-'lcKJ.U3^8- 
lalir« antjjoßE,n,*r»«i «uch ü«r/.itteph5üiJc,.iie «ivi/unr6i'ünaarliuhf.3 .H'..5.n umnahm. 
Bahex oegr.uiaet6 JUlin , iiil ■ i i ■■■ i "lo "«^«s ^*.?«na3t vpasr: l-ie ^luioktlk. 
hlt tetephyailt, i5a& luäcfo-'n r-isdsrua- yeT>lrre.n« lnt,P*n er js gecauac wie 
•ine U«tupbvax aeü :M'3 arct tine eolohc See vcruent a4t 1 -»ruV.lit ergaben 


Ji8 iaWiaklU!i-.iprir.s5pi'n Ur .in^>^y^n mna cebr f-öilf-wtclilff and die 

Haohfolg.3r ^cui-iü au« ituiiriß In diosaii l.üu^^n «uch vävecUiedene 


ayitlgi^^it dif^aer ^a^lBütimlx^n LogiJc odclizuwoia^-a^ «l^r Lofell: der ivatwiok- 

moderner Physika^ untväxwöxlöu i#ui:d«» iie. to.JSuB^Beü i.Xch f^lsno fie Ercglla 
mÄ#4tr die Oeltußg dlaaeä Ck^aetoüee vöttictdigt^fJnd -öerm i^.lt? i^^attirÄ:fatt»t 
▼on ßkeptiuoliön '5^1'^hrt$n als aaüjektiv urd konvtntionali hingrotcllt 
Wtod*jn^ behaupten di^ >!\ga:xlEti2:oh*?n :^hil?r>op]i>^ii Iri ]?iir',>lar.d gityni; d«n 

ÄÄöi^ dl« üloööi:' Duekription oder Peaohreibun^ cvi £^^^f*oh^^in\in(^ nicht ^anÜÄj; 

Ist Sv«;:i^ d'.3 ^altur ma1i:^riüU. ,ab(^r aii? ati^^igli von Jt.ijr,? .i"i mwio iiV.wt 

l»t yon derj'^nigon gruadverdOtiiedM, die boht^uptei, deea? rir .;?c^lohti- 
(Jeao{Uchi53v;andinngoo /erscaa^ii jaü.jhic» in :na**3land vird d?.5 /er imdcn8?ln 


ITr r^ehr sru a«!«.«;««« dio IiiU,.,cphle diacUltob .ein u'.fi ob:.chl ci» 
dM,.;j.n ..b,«eu «r «luhi.toriuoh ^7ar nna .iie /ielf-Mt de-. :»,mgen 
*uoi. der. u.ncoh*u ••ab.trokV aie unv.r.Bd.r Haha« .v,.aa,uicÄt iconKr.t; 

Ö«a«il,oü-,fl> und üur^tf .^nt.vioic.ais <)«r ^-hi.tarUcac 1,afc.r uli„ 
d»n «:j2» if0n>o3aa5'^xiBo.h aio« aaah c^..^rs i'cue di^üne ri9.H5) von 

J!f»t:e/l?ns:3tta *inp voll/- „m'»r.e *o>.-.»D.*-rü!:e *i3*3ni;>wraioa» 
^Jhooru, die eis ii,.t../lcnunfc der (»i't , 5e« ii.b^ri-u.Ä von 
ciZiCX ao2lr..l9n .VoiKütigu 2ur r.«.äer*m erklärt", .'j bcBithi ricJ. da 

a.. d.m Jaöre i2Ss.,,c ea ;,.i.»t,da«3 dia -/.r^^hi.äGaoa .o;,i »; .n i'or,^- 
tiontn m ihrer üI;ono=d;.chen. ^nl^.'iojtiung-^lccrcait. aoroh fiL ar^rslfi- 
5c:i:-a an«,-::, .uoei joüfm oinznii*.-! Foroatloxi ,at,er auua Uurai; di» 
angeM.-.iMu O^aaue ragi«- .,e>.i.n. ^i.;, fux alt« iro-' ^ulblg 
«isd, 31^ aicd d«:.^.i/,;x d-oxcu die -o^jitlaohan -»'..u^.3^ .»-nwivvir.dar ^- 

I.curtartlnow zi,hlt fcLijc-, b'...loic^;iuoh« '•a4..:at..« ,-..i-,dl« avif«n 
Utnf..n e«««UcciiifUi.n.x Ä't*lcn^rilp e-«xtim; da= O.s.v. dcx ;>.;*. inenden 
50115 «*r ««»•llsoJisftlicLt.G S«iM 1^ /arhaltaia 31c. **,,vaieoli3nUcheii 
£M'.TtnBti»«.in d.h. Bafi>.^cbi.'.d eliul .'U .^roduicticßn'<-rhr.-i tAi»..r. ,aie ge- 


v;oebei dieses Neue ,da3 -^enin zum Sohetzkemmer des -^aUarxismus beitrug 

aberuhte voll und gnnz auf den arnndsätzen von V^nrx und '^ngels.In die 
sem Sinne spricht man bei ui's von J^eninismus als Ilprxismus In der 
fcc^iKxtxitxkxxskffH Sroohe des I'-Tneriplis nus und der proletarisohen 

Revolutionen. — lUeiTiand oOüöt pIs Lenin, oagt italin ,iiat'ea die 
sehr ^;^iohtige Aufgabe unternommen die der Verallgemeinerung der 
auf dem Gebiete der materialistischen Philosophie der • v;iöhtigsten 
Brrrungenschafteh der Lehre in der Spooh^ von 3ngele^'bis itexit Lenin 
und der aumf.-ssenSen ^ritik^det gntimdtlser iölisti sähferi 3tröm.ungen 

Uüter den ""arxlsien, Sngels 'behäij)tete,dasä^' '»der .-8tei?'141ismua- nach 

jeder neuen Entdeöku.xg öine Äeue' Gestalt annehmen raüsa'>. .--* Lenin 

führte di:;se AuJga"6e'' fUr ' se^ne^'^öit^id de-. .i5aoh""*atisr iiiomuö Mmi 

) f t^Of" ' 

Emirioiiritiizic.mu3* aüä. 

(Jooif V/ioöarionov; i)zugasohv;ili 
italin- war um ne-axi Jahre junger als ^t nin(ia79-195S ) ^r lief er 

te in meiner Arbeit '"^eber den dialektischen Tind hiotorisiohen 'iilateria 
lismus '»eine bündige n Umriss der Theorie des ^^arxismus -»-eniniomus. 
Seine erste wichtigere Arbelt beschäftigte sich mit dem xlrtionali 
tätenproblem in Bussland, seihe letzte behandelte die Theorie der 
Sprache .In dieser führte er aus dass die Sprache als allgemeines 
/erst.-'ndigungsmittel keinen Teil des ideologischen '^eberbaua bildet 
wie etwa Literatur uid rhilcsophie. Die 'Sprachen der "erlt 
sollten also jkeineswegs zu Grund;iten irgendeiner kommunic. tischen 
i:uiibt-und ^7eltoprache eingeschmolzen werden, ^rst Stalin hat die 
Theorie des ^-^arxismus -Leninismus als allgemein verbindliche Lehre 
and Gr des sowjetischen Staates durchgesetzt, 

Da.darch dass Lenin und Stalin sowohl die philosophischen als auch 
die politischen Puhrer des -^andes a waren verliegh der Philosophie 
in Russland eine viel einflussreichere Stellung als in anderen Ländern 


ererseits erhielt sie ein politic^ches ^'esichtjein parteimäoSigea 

Der l^iarxismus Leniniomus erhielt eine so allgemeine Geltung in 
Sowjetrussland derengleiohen die beschichte der Philosophei nicht 


von Ihr Torstellen; wtiters daa MBeta^daaa die ProduktlTT6Xta.tzii£3€ 
von der BntwioklimgBiitu.fe der Produktivkräfte abhängen; dloa bedeutet, daas 
die ätrottur der fieMlisohaft von den ProduJttioneformen abhängen, ss.B. 
daae der Kapitallsmu» Im Maaohinenaeitalter enteteht; ferner gilt da« 
»ej^ets^dasB die ökonondsohe Örimdlage den aozialen Üeberban ^&Ax. 
die gftlötigen atrSaungcn eine» ^eitaltera beatiinmt; eohlleBBlloli 
Aas Gseetz der eozialen Revolutionen im aug des üeberganges von einer 
»oaial-ökonoiaiaohen iitruktur aur anderen. j)ieö sind die bereits er- 
wähnten iSntviioklungö-« Sprünge«, die an die geologiöohen Katastrophen 
von ^mUt er inner n# Ss gibt aber naah Konatantinow nooh anders Oesetas 
dieser Axt* Ss haudelt alch hier offenbar im Hjpothesen,die er «u Oesetaen 

HS ißt Intcredsant au hören,wie der erwähnte Fedor V. Konstanttnow 

sloh au der sittliohen ßrundfrage der mensohllohen Prelheit stellt. 

Br erklärt in einem Aufsata "l;er Menaoh und Die Oesellsohaft " (1963): 

.•••i>ie Freiheit ist ein gesohiohtllohes Produkt, das eloh in einem 

der Gesell aohaf t 
Bestimmten Augenbliok der ^ntwicklung/einatelltiiegwegen Ist die 

7rslheit der Porsünlichkeit nicht nur aufs engste mit der Freiheit 
der oesellsohaft V£rbUiiden,ßie existiert nur nach kaaagabe der L'ntv/ioklimg 
der Freiheit der Oesellsohaft. •Ua wird gesagt, der Ursprung aller aohwle- 
rigkeiten liege in der ''dämoniaohen'* Batur dsa Mensohenaeiner Sündhaftig- 
keit , aelner uroprUngliohen Aggressivität .Andere behaupten, die Tragik 
beruhe auf dem Bückatand de* aittlichen hinter dorn wlöseneohaftlioh- 
teohnlc^ohen Fortschritt ...Anders sagen... die Angst, die Tragik, di© Ver* 
einsamanj ,dle Yerlassenheit des ü^^enachen seien das Ärgebnia seiner \m^ 
ausweichliohen Verdammnis in dlessr Welt Wirgehen von der Voraus aetaung 
aus, duaa die Wurael alier Jebel, die üreaohe der wider spruohavolleu 
Lage dca lienaoaen in der sosialen li truktur liegt unA duroh den Ila&aen- 
antagoiii.^mus begründet lst# In einem aoalalistisohen Staat, in dem dieser ' 
Antagoniömua nioht vorhanden iat,geatalten sloh die Beaiehungen der Per- / 


aon 2'ir Odc^^llfiohaf« gans BUäeTBm -Konatantlnow verwirft also dla 
Prelheltabegrlfft äer tieothonilt tifttißohen oder exiBtentialißti&ohen 
Phllono-phor. ^±t JAoofrißa Mnrltaln oc^r FätI tttispf^re, Uan i;lebt aiJK), 

aln<9 f*nn.^ sndero ^eafjuting ^r^^. Die Freiheit der Per3öttlioh>-'6it wird 
hlesr mit drr l^^thtitt der a«cfJll9c.ha.n ifVentiifisi^rl-, dit-' doni Vßr- 
sohwtndf^n dir« Y\ntt%ftnrLntr,prcni''mvA fe^ruht.vüe bi^x^ifit .Ifdior auf der 

auob avTf /l^r Beh^^rrj^chnng^ «^<^r N9tnrs3sietsQ,dit> sich, im *ueohuinCi3-'7i^?5ra- 
aoheftXlo^hftn .?c>Tt;ÄOhritt änaaert^Cfanii im Einklang mit fola'aaa inaahau-. 
Tinsen äu^iaiirtan siioh aw«l marxistisohe t j^-^hc^ohlsahe fhllosopiiea in ^er 
*aohae»itso^irift «yiloaofioicy aasopia" (tr?ai3'garig l^ei/H.ei't; 4) di© die 
töohoaho^^loim.tlpo!tfl .A^adeiul« d*!r vi/idö^i^cuaftitm in Pjr^g puiill;^!^/!, 
A^i83 dig alnd?*lng9n In aen ^«1 träum duroa dlo ao?/.j;n*lriOhen KOömor^auteu 
«JTtent in aar Äv^aa^lohtö der H^neoäiieit einen '•Jor ing" aic d^^r. Heich dar 
Hotn'/frjcll^ar^lt In dn^üj^nigs d-^r Freihält b<?1autie^ Ll^a iat also ftio.^ 

blo.r^t.N^A^ iBt -iotf^T ^Ine? ?»Te:*^r*l^ 7on '"^^-v Crr^ßnlT^^ohüft noch in der 
0<ieftll^.ofjKft,«onderTi «1.n^ fs-rT:?^:-? dtxroH als- Cfesallauh^f?;^ H^o'i J:oast■^•lni;l^^ow 

luji B^o^hunr/^n fT»lgff©At.r,t ^voti '^en^^xi :: ob T^I «Lenin ^3in« T-ilsCi^'rcriii'.a 

Jieußu ?:l'^.t. Kd iFt aber i'l^^r ^r*lr?iitllc.^,da33 al"» ^-ica d^s por, önllcti^ 
SohlokB^ll tf?r mf loten ^(?nrth«*R ^w#r»tger b-trifft, . '. -^ ^a tS^c^ Koviat^r^tlnow 
den Vü^chcln h?.t,weil -»» dif1ml(?;fn nlolit bf^frladlgt- ,(?lo ein parsönllo^ea 

!;'lt af»n Themp, ^(^r fr^^lh^lt br-3o!^;.>i^t;igt Jdloh ;.•€-• riy6l:U^t5f:ühfeako 
tmd 7Ji»lnt,dace »wer Innere frtlheit otietiiv unabhanflp ipt >trotsd$jri 
nioht In Isoliorang betraafcitet *exdeii ii£van,v^^il sie nia^o^:Uv ü:n<f^-i^b*^ng 
bf9dlnfrt raid nloht erreicht w#xd«n Ji^-rio, luttt^a y^sn öLifÄ Aeu^^^orQ leTMo- 
rl€rt#»*J>jr Hauptfehler der sahlrticLt;. Bt^^riffe «x ?ralii^it 1.4 ^^et-Mi^ 

a.B. des Sxlat«ntl*aiaBBxs bö8t«ht daxin, daea «ie d«n dlalektisohen 
Ohi..r,,]ct9r daa lTiner«n uad Aeub£«» Subjektlrsr nn« Obiektivsn misB- 

Hm.wT!» Mrah G«»ellBoii«ft tini ^"'pgySlchte h««troff»r. -.Torden,. .11^ 
Gr-r^üUr*» fr..lf.r k^jü ißt . is^en. ^e hf.«,eer wir e.i^. '"IrkUchieit ien«en, 
nr.:3c-^hr ^-r^o^eit genifcsaei. «ir .P-Mh-'l* des '■mena beruht uicLt. auf 
iJ'ilbrtr^fi.xlon uad aau .iu« -.•Uö..b.llcten Freiheit vou äou Jcaet,^ea 
a<jr aondera «ui' der P.'.hljkeit; aaf araad /oc Wi^öön «lo« 

W^.hl zn trtffen.^iic «öl,«t vor., la , üns^ «.,„ auf ^raad ron -Viaeoa cioh 
nnfl die Netur b^herraaüt. ü« ?r.ig. sin-^r y«bsr9ln*.fci.->ra.ung uas Inneren 

u-vö len^Bftren reduaibxt aicü !i.-.'rt9feohlioh euf dio f:o-av'..r.?67is der .oala- 

lon nn4 peraöaüab^u iiitaxc^ssn. 31. k«i„ n, eiu.x durch ilasaanga.-enaätzel 

2c.rrivs«n«D 0«a«li.6o!iar« uicht «Tcist-lerec, 

ötf, n^ch Ihaeu d^e '^cUvicii;- und di^ lndiyila«.x..« '..cdrü„ftiei>l t nur 
t;ch;'di,:Tcn,.ahr athta u>. de/wt Indlvldiuülüiert avü der ocJfiLtx7«n 
"•^0.11 tat enfcruolc^ , i^^a üie a^enr ehllch*' aiisftcua f«..>h Elct.-aoh« .Jen- 
e'?lts rovi ^t nad böe« isfc,l.if£ fol£;t aiia ri«r eKiytent.l6,U.t.l.otien Auf- 
faasiiRg der frelh^ils .Ua vozi et'.;.iB,d-a ^eder darcn die meßaühlicUa «atur 
noch (J-'rsh arBl»!» Uea«t«6 beCTvtist Int, DeHvjosan irt in dur ^^rti-ti^msla- 
1!-M.=isih9n ?bllv-»»ophi4 dio B;,hlJr zu annafe^^n «la^r .-losoluüen Indivlduel- 
?'« T/clh^lt ebr#i»«h.^ffii woxien,.,, 7srl aiarx Uut trots parsUulioham 
ÄJ.-n!l mf vorfclgiTjig eine Irsle »Vsäl •u^.ia-.j si.;!j i>ylb«t", 
F.bor er »Rgte lia uegenbat« ac dl-c Bxlatc-nfciall^>'i*ri : Was lali raa mir 
ir^o'ic,tn« loh für di« wfc4.t,llcohrft ,1 atfv;u...*„uclfl j-f.^on,i. ae ich ein 
ncizij,X»t W«8«n bin. oo^eits :!*• g.-! nn/tte. d^ai der ,111» nox nl.. denken- 
d9r Tnt;9lle)rt f/(»i i^t.i;:,- rnrlaohtjo 4i» riai .-^oph-r.rUfc viel, nur an ncfühl hftiUn ,iit Ti.,8fss(5h".n vt-raouien Uhd üi« Bert-^rsi anm 
PrlHTtip 9rh»b«n. i^i^b Lomitsn -.ich äU t;,rg=.r JJLcneD i t..llo,:-orhv- , gxL 


.1.,. Worte köcnt*.>e.ond«* *1. air^.t. Antwort aa Uurtiu !l3iaas3« 
eilten, «.r .ine »vaUsC. • .ogik ü.." ..^u *.iBt onteog.ixs.cllt. 
T?ln. aar (rr«o.t.n 3i.rmg.u.atu.iien oex .Mxi.t.i.(;Uen Tb..ri. ier l^el- 
hM^ trf. die roTÜcret.l*S.«rnvig üe* Problem u«i Freiheit aur al« 

,,, .,,,, ^„, wi.ter im ai<> Kof.a.disic3it,«o..änra äl« .l:tiv. ::..ic.iltsuag 

ai^ bl.t.t, d.h. d.r.loulg.n.uic Xu der 'l.^ mtLalWrv 
sind, ric irnlheit entn^lt i.ii. .■.oxb«n dir. £r«s: Küö 

.t,i=ob.i.'.r führt, ei. b-^oAeidea«. D^.c-la .uf ..u Buch«- 
,egai.n . 4«a.e b..-»nnt eloh .ir Drittel i.v ^Xea^oMu-. .u. .o.i.llam.. 

dso v.o.J »hrhiXindcrts ist nur u.-t uer Aerp. a.i ^ 

,,. ..n,i «h.:n.-T '.ov-r -„..itloneu «On,..» c^.» >^ lr.,d..>.en Luv' .« 

...1.1...« '>^. dl. «i?'-" »«.ri>m80^..» .V ^l"-" av.^.a.ur.s,B. «-- '*^' 

£>tKl'^j:u>>g j^AA^ t^,^^q^ ",>^ux;e' Mu". TTnat'Jthcit. Sc sagt 

O.Yslt im Buche «aif jaucht, tot &9X freih»!»" (1947) , Oeas da» .►Aotir 
der f?<!oohlchtarhHoBophlf? miß er er Seit nai öie IcLet düß apcköl^fjptidohia 

c5rW.r>i:n a^ T5|-?j5n ifi'^'^h«» I)«-Tll in Art?'' ^nnv^t, t.I? ir^ rlm fier drjrLfct-leten 
Pe^lC'^.^n v*^r ^'^an^ehh^i t elngetrermi ;:ind^ Umx kr.nü ührjtllohifi Stlrmtmijfn 
TgJb.rrr»^ ^i^'^n •!>>«^r»rr'*?*^ynf^hs ^^n '^eltalteriS der :22LLr.T^nh^lti:jn7 und ftioih 
fttr fer.ffil^Ts >«rr. ^^eo'baoht^n^^o ßöjcte Maro Atirsl: all;-» I^r.onöc'aliofie 

a3,i:? ^»M.ItoK<ö Sedrohun^ deir Äiviliiiatiou, als Gtffaüir f^lr den ieitjcren 
B'^?5*'.'^ns5 cl^r Tienaahhcilt üirau;jtüil4in«Aahn.lloh. glaubt Jeder sterbend« 
Mts^jÄf».?« ndt Ihm «uaaiiHü^Ä die ganze ii'atar i^tirbt«« 

Wir 'niBs^n auiö don hrfabrragfa (3er V^rgan.-^^nh'^lt, i-'?f?s 

pfiiÄr^n ^.«n L«iuf ätr ?iQlti«— — üii^ philuaophi^chen und polltif^ob^n B*«^rlffe 
der MnfliohV'*lt? f»in«rvri:XikürT.iaüon Vsrnlohtung ohSektlrcr Kla^iorif^ch.or 
Pross^eRO , der Ä^ufitnl t^mg o(ii>r ti^>a iinfrjLar«n3 fjöaollÄoh^.ftli^-'hL^^r ?nt- 
vloJ:?-nnP'W. gr'indw Isfeaten ind<i» in cinam Torr^opftrnikanif^o^i'^n Prin^^ip 
3oß •go5silnsii^Cton Or^^nKm?^, ai« st^lic^n natv^rwft»ia^ dl?» OanhicKtf? 
cla dr.f. Of^hint d?53 V'lUlc1irl5.ofi<»n und ZuffRli^f^n dnr/v7n f^a ip Gf^rff^n-. 

TTe-a r^.^oh'^j '*l?!T?iBl mit Hilffi von Atc/n^affau ttn tmv-'niiue.lbarcn G>«fiCh.1chtf,-<" 

ö[.',«K.t;5»i;ri ^nte^g*ritr«t'3r knnni ;*!«• uXi^CAüti die r-tj aktiven Iio^-llcbK«!^ 
t«fn ^Ti» ^rad di4 Bo/JLauR.rtjn cor -.oriwC^Jiriit. ,ihrd j:^:,^iri&lH;ainr?7Tngen 
5U v«T>)ar8cirn ttid da« gyoßaurüi;,r:LiQJr^ UlUok für -.l?^?^ n-id .1f d#n cu 

•rreioh^n. In seinem Buoh. -Modern Sooiolog, faoe. p.«aindaia"rj)en Haag 
1988) wei.t B.B. Balley darauf Hin, man hätte vor hundert Jahren ge. 
daoht.daaa forteohritt eine Sateaohe ..lund da.a die .oaiale fitrolution 
gradlinig vor eieh gehe uaddaa. aioh die watUohe ZiTillsatioa aowohl 
la toatureller ala auoh In geaelUohaftlioher Blohtung entwioiae. 
H«ute denkt man.ea gebe keinen Jtortaohrittund das« «loh die sociale Syolu. 
tlan in Zyklen bewege und da»e aieh die «oatllohe Zivillaation i« Verfall ' 
nnd Attflöaimg befinde, 

TM- ««— *. » - .. *?* Ihren Goectaen" 

Die Angat ror der fl«8chlohte ^melnt Hondachian. führt zu einem srampf f.gen 

den Fortaohrltt.aer etwna ffifhelteradea hat.Hanohe eraohreokcn schon 
ror dem bloaaen ^orte "Bvolutlon" oder Sntwloklung. Hanohml heleat 
•■, Porteohrltt .el da« fferk herorragendex Männer .anaexe Zeit eel 
die Bpoohe der Itoaaen, in dem eolohe Männer nicht auftreten. Demgegen- 
über hat die Geaohlohte der letzten fünfzig jahre mit «eltenor Schärfe 
bewiesen, daee die ßeaohlohte nur eine fliohtung auf.«,lae.die naoh ror- 
wärta, Auoh wurden duroh dieae Tataaohen die 7erauche widerlegt, die 
Cesohlohte ala einen Beigen In Qr^laen darzuatsllen mit der ewigen 
Wiederholung de. Spirale ,iat, wie Lenin aagte,eher ein 
Bild der 2eit, weil ale alt Jeder Bewegung vorwürta kommt. 

Man rwauoht Jotat rieXfaoh den yortaohrltt ala Büokaohritt 
darsuatellea und uingekehrt,rüok80hrlttUohe und reaktionäre Bewe- 
gungen ala rltal und fortaohrittlioh hinau8tellen,.Vir haben keinen 
Grund ,dlo gegenwärtige Sohnelligkelt dea Qangaa der Geaohlohte au be- 
fürchten. Dioa sind die Oeburtawehan der neuen sozialen Verfasanr.g, 
dea Entstellen, einer neuen Weltordnung.der kommunletlaohen Zlvillaatloni 
J)er Gang der Oeaohlohte Ist sohneller geworden,well die Maaaen aktir 
worden und «loh an der Bewegung beteiligen »darunter auoh die früher 
paa.lp^w.ibllohe Hälfte der üenaohhelt.J)aa Zeitalter der Sklorenhal- 
tun|^iäuert* aoht bi. neun Jahr tau aende, der Feudalismua aweltauaend 
und, der Kapltallann. In manchen LänderK einige iTuadert Ji 


J^T ü«^ergang von der er.t.u Pha.. de. Kon^ .ax .weiten nalm 
n« Jahrzehnte in Anspruch .Dabei war der acborgang nie so brilak tmd 
kOB^pllziert wi. jetzt, denn .. handelt aloh nicht um den Ua.ergang von 
einer Fora der Privatwirtschaft znr anderen,8ona.m von der letzten priv«|. 
wirtaolxaftliohen z« icommuni ati sehen tto« nas.enloeen Form,von der Yor- 

geschiohte der iienaohheit zu ihrer eigentlichen Oeeohlchte. 

Z^ine vorangegangene Bevolution icann aloh in der KcmpUzlert- 

h^it u.d «ichtigi^eit ihrer Aufgaben ruit der scziuliatiechen mee«en. 

lÄ. .chmahe untwiciüuog der .>.odu^tlv^me hat die nngl.iohe Yert.l- ^ 

^rms der L«ben.güt.r nach sich gozogen.dio «ogenaätze zwischen atadt 

4 ^ «>iatiMr tand körperlicher Arbeit »die Spaltung der 
rmd Land, awiachea geistiger una «.«tyc* 

™ »4-««- «Y»fi nnerbittllohen Wettbewerb »Gleloh- 
öcsellaohaft in KLasaen.SgoiBwaa und tmercujuixo« 

hTVorseruf«. ^i" -a« «• -»n.ohllch. 3,.l, .n.ataUt ^-* a« ä 
ll..n. «, d. da^t *.«BUt .«It dl...n -,..ln «f .,.»^n. .Ion .«m 

„. B.3CtX.uuigung d« 0.» dl. W-^^ -«"« ^'^ 

.»««1.» von de. «.Ul.l.ruug d.r U...« »lokt reT.»h.B olm. B,- 
,U«.lchUga^ d.r «.g.l..dx» »r.t.r.«B d„ P,od.*«r«m..ä., 
„„s..n ■.l»..n»»l..n ,md ..=hnl«..u »r.ns»ns»h.««. «o» dl, 
»acMeU. d.r Mivatwlrtsoh.« „r.oh.lnd.n. «Ird d.r ««hnl,»h. «rt- 

.. - ^„— Ä-« Mnn Wird «loh mit dem Veraohwlndon der 
BOhrltt noch «mgeatumer wtrden,Man wxra ■lo» A.*=i« -" A«i.-r.s«^.lt rtdB.» t»nn«.Di. p.r.»nlloh. 
V„„t.ortu,* d.. Bi,.eln.n »u.. »*..lo«. d« vloMl^elt dleeor 

Unoor. P.iloa„p.i. .ei^t d» ta-pf «» "•" »«, . äi. 

- ^4 -» «nm nifiATitren »um Höheren und vom 
18t ein Spiegelbild d«B Aufstieges vom Hiedrlgen 

,r».«4«]..lten Di« marxistische Philosophie hat des Prinzip 
BinfacUin zum VerwioJtelten.uie mai» ^.,^^„ 


der tuageateltanaen Kraft mensohliohen T^ns. 

2ie Bolle d€»8 Mensohen Innerhalb der ßeaellsohaft 

nnö di€ Bedeutung der Seaelleohaft für das menaohliohe Individuum 

steht Im Mittelpunit öot/,]^ tischen "»^hiloeophlerens. 30 erklärt das 

Mitglied der Akcdemle der ^Tiaaensohaften in Uoakau P^.Pedossejew 

in einem Auf seit 3 "Der Ilumanlsmuö In der Gegenwart" (1963) ,daaa die 

franaöslbohe Bevolutlon xsssl 17B9 die Henschenreohte verkündet hat^ 

dl© wichtigste Aufgabe bildet Jedooh die v^erwirkliohung dieser Reohte, 

der Schritt vom AbatraJiten 2un Konkreten^Die "erste Erklärung des 

re£?len Huncni.^nua'^ v/ar das EommuniatisÄOtxe Manifest von Marx und 

Sngela und Jä±£/erat6 Aa&druok det ao^ialiatisohen Hunkanismus 

«Die Erklärung der Hechte der V/erktätiigen und des ausgebeuteten Vol- 

ket'^^diäS die SOürJetrepubllk Im Januar 1913 arlleaa« Die gedetsllch 

atatuiexte Freiheit ded i^otmarbeitera lat illudori&ah|\7eil er sich 

beim ^'^igentumor der Prodaktionümittel vordingen musa^um leben su können« 

T^iOite 22) 
Im Buohe "Wo stehen wir heute?** (autoraloh 1960)/melnt fiduard äprangerf 

die ne"*ien teohniaohen Srrungenaohaftten hätten dae seellaohe Qlelchgewloht 

des Kensohen g^aatSrt» 

Diece Ansicht ist »war verkehr t^sseugt aber vom 
wirklichen Vorhandensein von Widersprüchen In der geaellachaftllohen 
Struktur »rp-ß ^rrblpr. darf aber nicht abstrakt gefaaat werden in der Gestalt: 
teohnlbohcr Fcrte>chritfc- menschliche Degradation- ßa handelt aich hier 
nämlich um coaiale Wldorspruche^nloht um nicht exlötierende Widersprüche 
awlach^n dem Menschen und der Technik^ Wir erblicken in der Arbeit, die Kraft, 
die den üenaohen vermeaaohllcht^Ja ihn suia Menschen gemacht hat» Das 
Privateigentum erstickt aber die schöpferiaohen Möglichkeiten, es Ist 
nicht ntir eine ökonomlache Kategorie. Der wirkliche Humaniamus verlangt^^^^ aoll 
er nicht im Beioh der Phrase und des Traumes bleiben, die Abschaffung des Privat 


Die Volucon^enhelt der muBohliahen Peraü Ist eine Punk 
der .oiikor^enheU der GeaoU.ohaft. T)le Vertreter des abatrakteu m 
mus ;,c-rf.u d.n Marxisten vor, dnea ei« dl. an^gcb.uteteu Vollca^^Bsen . 
n.aaonkH»pf gegen die inebeuter nnd dl. urterdrücktan Völker «.uc natio- 
nalen Befreiungskriegen gegen die Folonlaatoren aufhetzen. i; «teilen 
-1« .»«r den Chnrnkter ihre. Iluiaaniemus blos., I^r i^-arxisrua verwirft aU 
anthun.,.lBtl.oh und unwl.^en.ohaftUoh die Theorie, d.., der i.ang ein. 
tragende ^^ Stellung in dar Bntwioklang der .esellaohaft elnnin^t. 
m. philo.ophi.che Annahme. dass die KrlegeUr Hatur des .ennohen we^en 
Miner angeborraen Äagrlffs-^ind ianpfiuat gehören.let faUob. 

i.oh die beklagte "SntfreMung" kann .an nnr durch die übgeatal. 
tung der g..aU...aftliohen Beziehungen be.eltig,n,denn ele ist eine Snt. 
fr.«dung Äaax.ü^.i«^^ ,„ ,,,,,, ^^^ M.naohen,ln der kanit^l, .ti- 
eohen ^roble. können weder existenti.llstlsohe 
noch theologisch. .'lUeX «ri.4i««, sondern die Beseltl^nj des Prirat- 
elgentun«. vollbringen. i)er üxi.tentialiamna erblickt i« uen.oh.n «in. 
Wi«8e . die aioh in apinnwab der Welt rorfangen hat und weiat daher in. 
Trnn..ondontc hin. .uch der moderne .honian,«. hellt trota seiner optiMati- 
eohcr.n Hin.tellong und "socialen ^atur" dl. PeraönllchkoU duroh Teil- 
nahn,e am tT.borainnliohan.TTr.prünglloh.atwa h.B. m dar -Jpoche .or Henala- 
aance hn'. dor IndlvldUHlianm. einen fort,chrlttllch.n Sinn gehabt, ala 
4ufl.hnnr.e. gcg.n den hlcrachl.cben Peudallamn. und in philosophischen 
^ ^.ercloh r.lE -xpürung gegen die tüdllohe H.rraohaft der .nogr.en.uie p.eaimi- 
ati.ohe rreb^^ug von der *erri.a.nh«it dar G..eliach.ft zeigt aber 
he-rte.darn sie nicht auf einer indiavidualiatiaoh.n,aondern einer neuen 
ge.ellsoh.ftllohan Sbena uober^.x..den werden kann.Dle ütog.stal*-.nne dar nat.. 
neuen Be.lehtxngcn i.t deswegen kein 3elbat.•.ok.^?^a^^er Mcn.^h ' 
..Ib.t.Ra .011 nur die Illusion aerat.rt werden.alaob dia saeliaohe 7er. 
rollkow,rnne dar ohne radikale ütaatellung aeiner Lebecabe- 
dlngangen «»r folgen könnte. 



ttosere aegau aehea im öoaialihmas üivelllerong aiia aieiohzaaohcrel. i>na 1 
die B88«itlgung sozialer 'Jagleiohh«it uator Jiel, a'a..-r dioa bedoutet 
Lenin «nfolge nloht die aielohheit der phifaluchea und so4::.tlgm Fällig- 
keiten des Klnaelnen. Kloht Jede» Kind kann ein »cnle v/erden, aljar die 
Glelohhelt der KntwloklungBbedingnngen soll gev^ährlolatct sein. Dor 
Mensoh Ist 8l8 Teil der Hatur ein blologirohee.aber auoh ein sozleles 
W«Ben, i^lr befcraonten den ßoarmand nioht als Ideal der Kenechhßit.flnoh 
•Inigen Philosophen soll 41e tieriaohe fiatur des I'.snsohen ihn aar 
Sunde und zam Bösen führen. Ver dies sagt.überaisht aber die vvftit /richtlPrere 
Bolle ä%T kapitalletischen ^©Seilschaft. Die Philosophie uad die So- 
sinlwiseensohaffcen müssen die -^eüingungen dea aozlalen Fortaohritts 
▼orberelten und die ''eber2€uguag einimpfen^ das» die Znkmitt d^n Tritinph 
des Priedena uad des Humanlamn« mit eich bringt» 

Me Philosophie kann nloht die Hauptprobleme -^ot -ensohhelt 
ignorieren.iie muaa eine klare ^mensohlloheii, friedliche Spraohe füh- 
ren und darf aioh nloht von den ifragen abv?enden,dle jeden Mensohen 

In fthnllohem Sinne Äussert «loh einer der älteren Sowjet- 
phlloaophen.M^B. Mitln, i^itglied der Akadcrola der nceenschsLftec In I^loekau 
und Jaohmann ftir/,hiloaophie ^mr ft fiHfcte (gsb^ 1901), In plrem iiufßnt» 
''I>BT Mensoh als Oegenatand phlloaophlsoher Untersuchungen ** a9G?5> 
erklärt er unter anderem: Sa rauaa vor alleiri mit dem Vortirteil nnfge- 
räumt werden »alsob der Marxismus die geiötlgi^ Seite m^nachlloher ^ätl^T- 
kelt rernachläa eigen ^ 

die aeellaohe V/olt dos nsnaohllohen •^Ich" 
missaohten und darajioh a weben würde ^den l^enaohen In der *^a8tie.ira Kol» 
Isrktiv aufzulöaen »B*/dle Persönlichkeit des ^enaohen mtskk ahaiTrennen 

Der M&rKlamuo behoaptet die lebervjältlgende Holle des Bewuaataelns 
des Gclankrns^cior T^o^n ^mä dea geiatigan Lebens dos Men30hen« 
Sr nUht die begeisternde umgestaltende ^raft iortbohrittlioher 



Ideen Ini Leben und Ie der üntwickltmg In Leben des Men^ohcn uii4 

der meußchlichet C€«^ell«iObs.ft,ob»/ofeLl er alle» Formen deß Idealfclmue 

ablehnt und die iDsteriallbti&ch© Grundlage raicr pcjchiachen Frozcst 

in seiner Dialektik 
betont^Aber glölohaeltlg lehnt er auch/ des TUlgä^en^motaphysi^ohen 

Liatorialiiäiiiua ab^die Ideallfizlertmg der Denkproaessa und flea ßeeli- 

sohen Lebcna des i^ensohen mit der i^aterie^Pie Ii'arxiöten führen nicht 

gleich deu volgären Mr-teriallsten daa ^ajohlsche auf &n^^ Pb^'sisch© 

oder Ph;yölologische Äurück,31« behaupten nur^dass die !'atcrio ^da8 

Sein fux das Bewuastaein griitidl^sgend aal und inruB iaae daß Be^vus-.t:^.ein 

die andere iaite der Uatexie^ihx Produkt ^ai^ Behauptet wird bloa» 

die irdieaha äexi^unft derjieen^^edanken ,der seeli2ohen Welt los Uan- 


Keinx des voxmarxistisohes oder gep^enw^rtlpetp nlohtmiorxlGtir.ohea 

System tit:t die Bedeutung dea Ll^nEChen in der W^t^e^ln* die Hstur nmge 

staltende vJirksaiÄäieit so betont wie der li^arrsiamTiö^Zelnee hat auch 

eeine ttnb.5gr^aate i^ögliohkeit der ärkenntnia ^^^b linarlngön» In die 

aeh^ironi^ae der i^atorg^^iöv/ohl in die atomare Welt als auch in Atn 

K.Oi:iiiOß sc heraiiaseötellt wia der ^arxiamuß .Während vlole Philosophien 

ä^^v Gegenwart üioh in aogananaten "Orenaaltnationtin^ Tti.rsrabonpv70;idt 

die rttroht vor dflo Todejdia Unterwerfung nuter den Zufall ,Iolden nad 

i:oaflii.t-3 reratandea Aordaa,\)eaohäftlgt alo»i 11« marxiatlacfie Phllo- 

80fiii3 lai» ^ea wiriiliohon Untwloklansabedliifrnngfen dar seellaofion 

Zräft«» dea -euaohen.aie lohvt den ftenaohea nloht flb=?r fLon Tod.aoadarn 

eloh ZOT 
ilbar das I.ebeü aaoSiaadaaken.'fer Äta/marxlatlaohen ^^»ItsnEOha i'iüs bekei 

kann aloh v^eder ela yerloren.nooh ala ▼ereln««nv% oder ftatfromdet füh- 

len.d.x 3» ala ::itglied der Jesellsoliaft ,de« Kollektivs der ^oiiorr- 

»abor der Jaiar ist, .Im Vergleioli alt den fcenaohen früherer 303l.aler 

3tri&tuiea,iÄt der itoasoti dtr aoilalistiectien &eaell80haft der freiest«. 

In GagoceatE sur fcathropologle dea SxiatentiaUataTM Ist der Kea&ch 



d#? ip^Ticietie.oheß Philosophie tcii. i..6afc»3ii dea a:oä««| der Angst tmd 
dM i^«idTO,ÄU«)r gasöllaoh-eftliwiiuÄ i.iaaiuag«n en tt h n wc artt y t ii Kantri KJ 
inn«yUch ••frei In Am Wahl" in d«x Ih«örio,BOi?ir in V7lrltiiohkelt 
•in Knaoht dei H:tt*«±t^)iim oad ^oaialöa M 2w«ng©» ^sondern lYei 
In VerK^^tnla «n len natUriiahau uad aOÄial^sin Öeaatamäasigkeiton 

&r«n»Jsltnn%lonon'» raeiait tjatürllah Mitiu dlt Philosophie rm !Carl 


In stiner. Anfeatg "Eaticiiulluiatts ima IrrationelismuB ia 

d« zelteecÖBSlsohen Phllcäcpble WeatearopaB und Amerika«" (Moskau 1963) 
greift Brofesso» 6 »A ,Eui s saao » dca IriatioaaliamoB »n and d«tttdt 
ihn «soh lanla »Is tlna ifuroht dor h<jrxaüh»jndau B^axgaoisie vor .a«r 
Brstarlciinp d«a;3.J)03wügeu gsalft ai* aom ü«o«:f holten, 
llltt«lalt«.rli5h«»n,a-aiB hl,!r!houaa von i.>iuino und sogar »um iil .Aagraatin, 
»tiruok. Irr«l5ion.illaiatia ist daa Glaub cuabeiioaatüiij uaa ßscisten- 
tlÄllaim»,Al^«wt Cßmuß erklärt iia "üst'a« d» ais;?piio" , uaa» die 
Walt in Jhr«ifi Wesen htoaurd «ad die üjdtoiaa des Jieasohen ahaurd and 
nateloe eel.Doeße Aljsurditi-tt it.t ela irgecals des äaeamiaenetosaea 
menrohllehe« Fr»e:«iva xdt Jsai ;JcifcjiE«a 4« Aeit. ^iee war übri- 
sren« «"ich «i« Aatioht vieler "L3i)«i:^päilOÄOpien" «•B. Ludwig: Kl eeea« , 
datr. aufol;^ dlf W.iss^^nßohaft die natuiilolic Welt rerdorben b.*t. 
In meinem K^ah Tl» AtomboTabc cuad iie 2akanft a*8 keneohen" 
rerkUnaet Karl J-^^p-sts clie Slchttgkiit d^r ISxieiens der Menschheit 
und den Kult 4es Tod«»« In aoitiem Hnch "Dia grojeen ?hiio»ophsn 
»teilt er die Philosophie der "-l&ssnsoiiaft antgegen tind «iartia 'iei- 
deggor geht noch witer,inatm er erkli.ri,daie die Idee d«r Alaaen- 
tchaft ülfsrasle ein MEEetat füi' die zUlo^iorhie &ein kAtm. Daa philo- 
eephlsche Decken eoll dl« öohraaksa dor ^'ernunft a^trahhraohan 'ind 
eine höhere atnfe ^latlger l^st.'itig-ing blldön. Diese Form der Oegen- 


d«r -^irmohteit £ina«u wir bex B«saon,Boat)Xoux.üroc«,iolo-..;!o;'/. 
Losal:, ...nt^^iuK;. Da»*i aoU d.. philoaopUiaoh. '/.roueheu intuitir 
Min mö m^Uttiolüar d*a a«gen6ta-aA In sein« gwxB«« Wahrheit «- 
fMUoa.M. mtaUv. ^YlÄtmxg bear^^praoht einen hi5hst.n Btnt^ta 
ala dls ..lasmsahafUloti« 3«tnllnntpr9«ohTuig 'n^d v.r3o!ii.Ul^% 

In Tnoaerren -roteBtnntlB-ntiB nb-^lt«* ein. ähnliche lrr.tlo«aU 
n.«nd.n. .Sicht M.«.n.chr,ft ..on.err ^«li.lon erac.eint al. "ab.o. 
mua ^lno.n%3a selbst ai. .?hUo.ophle kann aioht dl« ^aUxhsit 
in Ih^-.n wahr.a Me.en «nUxUiien.Sle «uaa dafter .^Wlo.ophie der Heli- 
glon •..rden,':!illIoh «tlärt off.n, dass Philosophie l'robiome .tollt, 
d^« n:zr die naigion l!i«6ti 'Kann nnd anoh Nlebuhr bohaupt«t,das8 
di« ^^r.r.^:t..lloh«n philo.opUinohen Frr.^en Md^rspTüobe enthalten, 
ai. die Grer.2t.n ««r Veruuaft an.oigen,die nur Ta.ologie üb.t.o.i.el- 
t.n 1.^^. Bc- ergibt .ich inabe.on.... au« ■iilUoh. 
aie prot..taaU.a.en .haolog.u viel .o„ den ..iat.ntiali.tcu .rboxst 

Dl« 3.,^-tau kriUaier.u .war aen Iirationalimus l^.rgBon.. 

aoni. ,am. .znd do. .xi.t.a.xali.ten und«n .iu. «Xs V«rU,idige. 

,.e lVUon.liemn hin .aber di.a i.t «in eing.bild«..r 

ru.H.^u.. 3 i. .^tell.n n.tBäcKlioh. .in. lll.rBrohi. von v..hrh«it,n au$ 

«1« ftlr thsi,ti..he 'Mloocphl. b.«rlchn.nd lr.t..I)i. '^h.nlc-en .« IcathO. 

Machen voa L«..n K«b.n In eine. Buche "Ub.r.. .t .,rif" 
fT.r.lHeit uua n^ v^.«r E.terorlen von Vshrheltrn .rd.cht t 
orstena ,ev.öh»Uohe ..hrheit ..«eJU.n. 
.>h,.I.elt.ctic dlo .'xg«br.i..e cxp.rira^utaU«. .Ti..en.chaf. bogrexf.; 
örittcps Philosophisch. .ahrhei..dxa ,av,i..« ioitan der 3itUlohlceit 
at^d a.a .cialen .^..b*a*« nicht die dohersn Oru..d«.t« 



4fS 3eln2,4le nur der Höll*.?ioT5 »Tte-rnplloh slnd^ Jnoqtiet V?Tltoln 
bernft sich auf dsn iii*ü?horQan von Aqulnc^dass ••^frihTh/et Ig CJctt i^tt'* 
I)er rhcmiarnne beiixaoiiwet .Vieeenßctisjrt rnö Vaxtiaiift al3 iilß ^ö^re 

zn iJerrn t2i£tioiiallfe>tii&ch«n 'i!enäanÄ<»n In der i5f?ltg»^nÖ?ölsah«in 
Philcc ophie- des ^i^z^bu ^iiält dt<» .PhllOdO:>hie 'Jos öialckilccbon und 
hlfetcrlfech^n fetea^ialiamuß an den i}^öfxnkcti des v^irkiicheic K&ilcn??li3- 
rm^ ff.att^lls ist di^ /^aiue Pbllc.-opble der Vernunft ,döa Fortftohrttts, 
dc^ Zornm ismus ,©le seipt? ^,^r T-rimi^^chh^lt »inen '^efr rix rlnrr prüf.olr.- 
ll:5h.'^r»ri. /'/ttkim^u, clea '^dß eine« m!elngv'»schr^•nktc•n.,v/lrp.^nnc•h^ft;llchen 

In Dcr:tscfcir;n& ,u.lö der heute in der SArjetunlcn vegan c eines'' ^'^tI- 
slcnliirus" Y6:fdpjKtfit«5i unp'arleohe %iri«fc Grecrg Luk^cf* In f^ein^^m Btiobe 
^JAcs ^^fitfi'^i^rtmf^ der /e2»oanffe'' gsftihrt !?st, l?i ^'^elohem aiierdiritrs ncca 
©ifif» atJ-lrlr^re pclitleaho Lelöwnsohaft Trlt.5*oh\^lnprt^ •Wjrd uan der 
'*'>7est?«»n'' ü0rart wegen ööiniis Irr?5tJion«il-lsTf»ii8,d «h^ der Oeringaöhät^snng 
der Yerttanft u«iaichtigt,Äo offeab^ren Öi« ÄOwjetiectien Philosophen 
«venctiCisJ. ^intSj. tritAf.,fliaißdi»n Glauben ron d<^.t Allaoht öer VermTtift;^ 
41^ stob a^Bt iin Aafc.ftw^ tok iroffs^or J^r* K-elwil "L^t «^ensab Ire 
RaUT&Ä'ltalter '* äu-söru« ^ir frpigt sion autsäohat ,ob dies« Ausdehnucg 
dur V.^nnolieaicfäfta blo«» sLoanvitatlTer oder auoli (i'zalitativer Sinur 
aelii wlrdg'>;%ttB auf die bökj^uüt« i^r^ltfilung Im dialeiitlsohsn Jisteriallßmu« 
enspleltti^'r ui^iiai^das» der IFmiatura dtr B^^-slfhung^cn iTisoUtiri äiensoii und Jlatur 
«loh so f-and^inöevitiftl geat^lttjo^draa sr aioh «nd,<5filtl3: to^ 3«r 7or3l53llung 
befreit, Q^sa 4fT m^ns<5hll^Kftti :Trlc*nntnlQ u^^ L^lgtrx.iar üb^rhmtpt Ir^endwal- 
ehe Greoisen ffi^aetjst ??tTidt (ri^wlea iribt «a novih irom^r ?rophat<in *!rr '^snaohll- 
ohen TÄ3LT*?XTrt5(Br«n<ii , infcellffktn«-lleTi CV^g^nilgaiaa ^aber die .^aellen colohor 
TToborseuguagÄn liegen in den geaeilaohaftlichen BeÄiehungenpniofcit In der 

ilr-oißr peeln-i'ccn üce tjfesugtagliobon: 5er tiefet an i^^iidiifüriiaaa der Stru|ac- 

ä«?T r'bsl^olion l-:!:::;rcr$;>b-iu\£ Oiolkov/s?^!:^ l^eiucUpk^ia^du^^ä aioh Öenerat Ionen 
vi:m 4U?iitrctiatit6n in de"a i'«;r*r.JircUik«uva ^^r^lea vV^^Iulueju oad a«i4^teiA £lnder tmd 

xi:;d dciS'^ das i^oiitJLge unu pii^ßlöCh*^ i?otiiuuiai aess --^öuboiisxi uuaxaohöpfllch 
icid IctiK Willis dox ^riind« dt^r ff;!?b«rrxetlk Norbert v^iener don Tod der 

licr heutigeil ?lw&€ncöh/ift*I;l6 ^i'&^llchkatt ^iner iiitarateilAren Migra- 
feioa ii.t keirLüfc aas«ufcchlleß8»ii tind ^^a-rdt ^uofi die ^'oijox Windung de« 
FTsKrCäsa» 'isa hiuC^ea auoti Ä^ßi Äcw'fat.lsohe 'rhiiOi*oiiui$r. iUA.»»axwaJPow 
unc t^TtFvl^jvü ar.;^xi:aiixit^i:^ö ;3oiiioii^=al <^ea Aeü.catiiäiöuati T;ar enta^hiav^ 
den al3 di^^ aQaaÄniö'.*iwaiid .Veitanaiaiit aarcLi dii& diiabütiftolie araet,3t 
r;jira«^Ji»aii 3f;.:Tdt .var bjwiv>aou^da^Ä 0» ^itialiti^UTU j .sex jü:ii«de gibt; 
und ^!/^3s aijix^i ^Ji'i^aicU lu1i,all^Ä aoi alnfaob^^ ,i?it\ricnaar© i>iag« au- 

?i.loU^aus Uivorlielnibaro aa boUau^-eu^Iion^« ^nüouhru aiuc üo^oti« Annahme 
j44ar /arüüaf-ijaa 5rxiüus«#Ji^ö üyit/rouuaöi^i. bcv/ciat» nioLt acuc einat 
njn^;A'7r>(4nlloh::a Aa^maCiJ ti^d !i:it.fö^fc.ondi?i'rj t^.itica pa&atua&^oOiiea Grad der 
Pr^r*..^iiolon ucu'. :li:.w.v.uü^ Jb^ '^igtiürabiuiia" ^d.<iö iu Boia -ÄöjJiünd in aeioer 
ber'Ik:::i'kni -^oJ(3 vor T.t3rJ.^r üulö ivundarii «>aar<»n anaepraoii^l'iati hente 

TJfenn aa oineri "koamiaohtn Welfcochmör»^' gibt^ ao 
iiöhrt lUu die UnsliAlitfrUdit in dön küipitRllr^tlfiohen Ländern, die liiög- 
lijIxkUl einjx ntueu luriegakÄtaatrophUiWa^rtmln^tion, Unter druoKtmg 


Hämi«n.Holfcn kann ihc. ai«iuaii<l,*edei der iJäaou de& -oiaate» aoob 
Posatme des i'Tüeiagela, 

>ie»w. der ^Orf«naurittm Slaiekti aofiftti .ogiL, auf de« Söblete dar ?/is8fn. 
8aüaft.aaiaaaUiof. der PUvÄli: ^x^ctiaawaiasa. iiatooi -«eilt -ose Logik 
«igeüUiaH .lao auf Hogol iiaxd«k^eaöiidei^iax^U«aÄ* üuÄurpüilo..ophit 
voa Sngels iind Lenin 4ar, *l..i, uaäU^uowai^- ^.iil s.b, ia Aafeafcs 
"mai^kWeoJi^r Wldorspi-ttoh ia der .uaaieanügüexiik" s^lgca, cL&ga ds« 
voniilflla Bohr mA aer "i-opeuh&gfcaer 3oJiiü.e"der rUjaik auXg*ät«llt« 
Prinalp a«r iromplementGrltät, deriizufolge die Jikrotfeiicheu eo7;ohl 
EorpnBfcaif.r-fcl8 tuch Isiieneigeusciiaften oi'fcnbtixen, uur uuf Orand 
äw fiislsttibcbezi Gru::4*atz ds« widferapruoha seine Begründung riufiet. 
DleM« Prinzip beatsht darin^dasa "alle Saturerscheiuacgfeu ^and ?ro- 
z«aae gflgeasätalioüe ,aicii gegenseitig aaa3ohiie«atiade .Ug^^nechaften 
©«•nbpjren.Waa gilt auch für das ienkün und die äeaeilaoUafli," 
Oaillnno.vBJcy fdhrt dabei c'.ua,da8o bareib« dar v«ratorbead Ääaidant 
der Akademie der -^UäbunohuiUa ia iioükua 3,I,^av/HcB den älilHfeti- 
aoben Ohöi'akt*! tax Allzzoo^^W^to feßt£;eetellt hLÜ^üa^sii-v laolute, 
oaa* üie iiUs«iimt3afifa4ÄiaKixgBa3ückfi21am irorpuskul-x-aad T.-cUenrigen- 
BObaftexi i.«r Jiaterie aar die ent^x garige ^«utsii Acuseorutgen eine« 
und ceeaclben Dinees uiid gloioLaeitig in der i^atcrie vorhanden 
aiad, "^Jg Jp^'*^'l'^i^^ ^**^' *^" diaiektiEOheu /'lasrcprüohen d.irchdrim- 
UtiD.-ie «aeaüur^at Itx Yoibanden»ein,lhr» gegenacitigc Xarchdrin^ung, 
di« Ma-mii sitior ur^d da» Aofta-aoäen aaae» "iJereKi^-Ohfc. 

Damit varboudöu idt die Belativität des Elementaren xxai. 
Komplexen, liaau üitiüorti öioti i.i', l-Ielinohln dohln, aobon Lenin 
beb« boll6:lp^et,dBE iSlek-öron aei «bmso uneraohüpflloh wie daa Atca, 


Die«. la.c öcr «ner3ohf.i>riaoh«alA: cplaxUei; des .ücrokOBtoe ^r 
Vi.i« Ueaet., de. r.u.i..oko...Uoh.n .elu u...^ Leiu« A^.^uuaa^ auf den«. uuntltetlTe und .uaLitati.o .' gehört .u den .it^on- 
aolxaxien der Uaterl.. Mo :Tumdlichi.elt ilircx .ualitativeu TcrBChie-. 
äeuiieii. «chU«33t die Auf.tcllmg ein«a «iuh«itiich.n ^uuuti.r.tiren 
^,..Uea . da. nlia :iisensoa.,x'tsa der ^ateri. -o^ ^ödc 
a.afe d« ihre besonderen üeaet.r aufweist.. Be].anntlioh 
aaohöc nb.rt «Un.tcin u.oh eiu.r .clchcu ullu^'asu enden aieioUung. 
^elioonin beheuptrt a>>cr e prioxi a'xf arund aein.x dialekUsch.n Phi- d...e .in .oloh.a Seunlix.n I.uo.Uoa Ut.) Jen« ixa,an..r.iärt 

4* , «1., «iSLi±x*«« V^5san d«r ünendliahlceit der M©.Uri9 
».tr.ff.n, Kann.» al.,r In i.:g.»aoin.=, s««»«»-'»'' Aagc.*lloi nioht end- 
gültig E.I»ct «»rd«.,do.i= T«.».h. d.r dl«l.l:ti.oh. .it«!.!!.«» t.^ 
j..« ,„rs»r.m,6B.tut. .re.l... Hl™»»». al.=ol..t« «.hrh,it ..rau..u- 

g„lf«,d«i« =1. d.. W.1U,« ro.t3cl.rit<. d.r «l.,.n.oh.rt .ug.U- 

P.T. Xopran .r::l*^t, in .ine-. Aufaatz «Dar dial.).ti..ue .lat.ria- 

iisiaas ißt di^» ^oßik: dei sr.odernefi «l.e9aboaaiviijat.a -« p 

^ -.«grübet dl., m .'olgood« 1dla.=:.l= O.Jo'.tl^U.t ihre. ..sct» 
i., ...dl. dt. ^,\U^U=>^' naUSUi .u "o^e.- .-.aU^» »of-algt. 
il, Cl...t., d.l ll.-<l.Mlk nlTilUh .Ua,.n ^ =at J.n ailr-r'äln- 
.t.a C=..<.sn d.r •3.,«s>m8.äar i.l».«.w.g<m« d« -iracLluansdn l.r 

.„Hai,=u -.U.i.l. »l-'l'"" ■>" "Sil: d,r >'i;,J«?^:„^n/«-'^=''»* 
it. o.J.wlvUät der ,l„s.n.o;«.«Uo)..n «.srlinTHr-lhx.r T..-,-.d.r- 

lichieit nnd j^luldltäb.Auoh bt«ei*.t die lAaieJctiK ,« 
öine uljer vie tfnt«l3Jtl'iog diuua.öei^-^^d« *iw-ca.jaua. 


f.atBnatalltn. -W««« Usb.rartif'mift d.okt üoh mit äerjenlg^n von M«- 
liuehin, es «ei xmaügliob die IMendllobkelt endgültig ku deflni.ten. 
yerner erklärt Kopnln^d^e Denken weise drei atnfen atrf : die anlmalieoh^ 
Ut menaohllohe «nd die «ateHinelle. In der die Uaaohinen die Denkfä^ 
hlgieifc eruetaan. In ihnen offenbart sieb die Vernimft In ihrer reiu- 
aten ?ürm,uii«e»türt duroh «obeneraoheinungen.In diesem 3ii>ne ist Ole 
Ueaahlne al« üenklnatruaeat dem iJeniÄPPnrat des mennohlichen Indlviauram 


Me mrterialiatisoha Dialokt.ik eis iogik.erklürt Kopiaiu, 

wurde Ton aaülreloUen aowjetisohen Denkern Toearteitet.e.B. in Buob« 
"MalaktHk und LugÜ" yon B^. Kadrow^elne'a «weio&ndigen *(erk, waloaes 
Tom Phil03opiii«,ohett InaiHtut der Ak^idemie der WiasÄsoliaftea in 
MOakau 19S2 üeriiUftgegeben wurde; vroit^re üuoü« 'i»iaiektii. 
als S-uriu des DeuKena Ton M.N. aexejeifJ im Buche «iAe (ttuadaätzo der 
dialektiaohen J-oglk" von M,M. ROi^eutol. 

i)er bereits 'erwähnte ö^. Zwraaanow weist iu einem ÄUfsetK 
«Dl« logi^fthen örnridsätae der WiEßenaohaft" darauf hin.daoa bereit» 
Albert Binatsln cnf die logieohen Beatandtelle der Physik gelegt 
hRt,ao «.B. anf den Zusecroenhang swlßchen Seotnetrie tmd Ph^cik. 'SS 
arkL^te darnebe» in elnetn bertlhmten Vortrag.daaa seine Taeorie dor 


Die Kenntnis und das 3tttditt)a dieser iumv^^vixiMee 
Toraua6et.t.Auoh diels Bohr hat in «einen Momoiren "^t^u^^^xlr uud 
Philo8opbla%dle »uerst In rnasisoher ipxaohc eraoUianen Biud.reröf- 
fentliohlioht wurden, darauf rerwiesen.wle notwendig es eel. die legi- 
sahen Grundlagen der reracniedenea Sparten der Wisscnaobaft zu jntsr- 
sttchen. Attoh vierner Heisenberg toehendelt den Zuaensuenhaug der erkennt« 
niathoorie und der msik, wio^tig iet aber Tor allam.wa. jene Wiesen- 
sohaftler daraber gesagt haben.die AnhiÄger des dialektiaohen 
llsmu» waren, »o d.i. Wawolow Dieser zeigte wie inuig die Vorknupfang 
»«lachen mio^ophie m.d Phjaik bei Qalile0,.iaaaondi,-.3aoaftoa, Äap^er 

ae^^tJOK^ LOTnonoasowj üerideiej^w^Urooiw >HLano3c nnd Ünstelii war* lit 
gilt für alle Hij^^alkar^dle ainon breiteren Ausl?ll<^k habeti. Wg^ilo' 
botonte 41e Dichtigkeit von lenlna werk ^^MBtürlelifSTaus und Hnpirlo- 
krlt.lälßnu3 '' flir die i^^nt^dovittosr i^r Phvsik tmd überhfiuot auf dl« 
Wlchtlg:kf:it der Ideen ^.^^ dlalektlfiobiin X?f?tarl«>Hf?Tmt? für dlo blasen- 
i?^haft im allgerr^^lnon» unlängst h^-t d«r rnit^änl^^otae T»nkor k.JojBfZhozha) 
Torgesohlagen, ein '^^icyuin Orgenon Dialootloum^ ,elae dlalektl^oho 
Propacl^^miE der Wl,3seneolmft ana^uarboiten* Die Uauptaufgabo einer 
der^Ttigen Io<Ti5'5h^n .Anal:;«« der ^^MssenaoheiTt i^äre e», d?i« d:?naiai80ht 
(dlalelrtleohe) T^'^sen der *Lasen3chaftliolie Svateiae su finden tmd die 
Mittel uruT ?<»f-o einer weiteren frachtbaren Sntv^^icklimg der wlsaen«» 
»of\aft liehen l^rkeuntnlö der Welt; su entdecken» — Tfir sehen filer^ 
dasö ITOTaeanow hier da» Wort^^dis-lektisoh In laanmern aetgt nnd ea dadnroii 
ge>i»l9serTDaßsen el*? 6l<^icabedeutend mit "dynamlBOh'' hinstellt» 
Kirn fearn hior aur dio aUgr'3eine ^estatellimg inrvchen,dasö die meisteÄ 
?h:7alkor bisher in ihren Füraotiimgen ohne den «^dlaleictisohen Materia- 
llsna« nit meinen Atifi^ohltlcsen au3(jekozRTnen sind. 

Der hier erf;ähnte Logiker (lex UolTerßität Moskau 
bctkl uKt aioi i ,^ . ^ 

}IJS. Alf^y:eje^ j^etadfcStt/in' der Zeitschrift «PHoasowaHje »f ^hllo- 

öophltoh^ ^i-ecnsotiaften) (I96?>^ra)> dß»e öle »w^l hcinptsäohllchen 

55i»it?ioh7*lften für '»hiToöontile »^Wowossy Pll08e6fll«(Dl3 J^nf^n der 

?htlcij^T>hl*) vrä "711op»POwskl}e Tl^nki^ wenip^ mnf dem Sabiet der 

^o'H'^ r»T)ft7.l3lerfjn; mpn mfl^^se aber die n^n^aten ^rnn/rünso haften 

dieser ^l.isr^nsoHaft innbeaniidere d^^n rusalac'ien Pädagogen zu^^m^lcli 

mohen nnC( dar kl^aalBahen iJBgick.der dialektischen und der uathema- 

tl^ohen Loi^k ^Innn grÄaderen j?lata im liochsobtastudiuni einräumen 

w-it ein© b<!fionclere 2öit,8oarlft "Woprosaj logikl" (Fvagen der Loirik) 

becr^in^ien. Pf.ego Anfnahne der racthematlaohen Logik In das Ilootisohul- 

progr-mm bedeutet eine iibcralisierung gee<^nüber der 3taiinära,da 

jdtftfe früher die s^ffibollaohe oder matheiaatleohe Logik innerhalb de» 


matii<jBfeiti&oii6i.i i>ia«iplinea olticn notdUrftlgom ütttor^otilupf auohen 

A9t raatiiioma tischen iofik Ist in auuelmid erst 1959 «»raohieaeniaa 
nennt Bloh '•SLöracnte &nT mnthsnntl^chon Lo^l: nnd hot P»3 Jtlowikow 

»tsra Verfasser« '^yotaden ollob ^lif» A^Jl^hnwng der anel:^tlaohen Philoso- 
auoii hier b^uoTflibar^ Hooh Itn J^'4ire 19159 hat der ic&ukaalöcbe Philo- 

tn'id Ä^^r wi>^0n ihres behslpt^iten ilrypt.üÄdö "ond ^^k^pti^lsn 

'^Bt^hen^/^wlro» Lcckerxtni^n elnd aber ^:jamj 

aoph ci»A# iixutien di-a öc^iniontisclACH Thiloacphie des v/eatena im auohe 
«£ie i^;i3iiatiniöt-üeori<d ler :ll:^e!)emerj sernantlic" ^öoharf iaritiaiert 
und -mein mui» »iagen-ohut; (^eaügtiuae Ken^tnle d^raelbön-verdanimt» Aber im 
Juiii 1S64 ureohiou das Buoh dßB Leningrador Professora L^^O^Beanikow 
"Die gnos-eclogisoheu Äagen der aeuiotlk'^ ,da» viel saohlloher ist 
ala di# ^omii't deiii'^d >-:Hiik:%Älaohen Torgäxigars^Man sieht also ,daaa 
das xindriiigon der Philoeophle das Weatena über Logik und ijemantik 


jbia gttöjiöerea Intsrf^ese bietet in der ttngeheur<ün philo- 

aopi*^ii*cheu ''ü^xpiohion" in Hucalaud als Folg© de« ÄLarxiarnua-Lsfoialaiiiaa 
die Bcfaen-dlung der Grcaohichte der Philosophie, weil die rusaiaohen 
Marxisten hier endore "ntawortanfT^srnndla^^n ^ebrauchon ala die Philo- 
aophea ües Wectans« i)o. der dir^lpktis»<^he l^latf^rialismus ala Gipfel und 
Abbolilv^a aVnr IhÜj^^^hi^ hehnndolt i|[ird,80 daaß dl© ^^anze itoiW 
tj?ioklung auf diese ra!,alni^1:lon 5:ulättft,?rteteltet aloh die Beurteilung 
der eirsclneu Denker fler Vp)«^^h<?lt RüöeBS ♦aie werden bewertet 
ntich iiCaaegiibc ihrer ßtnfcr^V'Uiß^n Anrährrung- an dna Ideal dco dlalekti- 
ttoK<^a ^^-atexicliei^ma^j^swegeu erhalten erwiöße Denker v.le im Altertum 
L'pücOT und i)fc^t^ojQ'itU4i,*Wi<klit »in cer Weuzcit; der -^eter^dnibt 
üpluci^ja^die PhilOHopht^n der fran2JÖsxHoUen Aufklta'img^aehlieaslich 
aigel und Lud vlg peuyibaoh ein {?anz andere« ^ev/ si^ in den 
lilb^acxigfcn '^be'jhiohteD der rMli^sophle inneh.vtton#In disaem Simie 


Lehir^ta d«f Völksr des Ogtans imd ^ostouä Im IQ^^ms SO » Ja'irni7iidert|^ 
*s»a «owohl in fi$T i^^^tllohmi ala auah itt der datXiohen findit^oiiea^ 

Ä«n waren, Dlo rti^slsche Phllosoplii« luüat also die iui "^estöfi boiiubt;« 
itmpir ^ ariT^a und MÄterlallantia^IUt. ^nl^jcoix lortc^n: ähüi aiaoltracen zxm 

ijir 3cÄ,^-'w förn«:''ide Oe^oblohtt dex Anti3i^aj^;.u4 Xi^d vorbtjroli;ung das 

r<2fetru'i*ow« #,wltl<»rlegt di«^ VoraftGilxing, uis ob ai>r juealnlfti-u« oint 
rtiu ivffßlsohn oder öol>15^che »ii'r.oh ?iuu:^s ^tl# jL/<iir i^enlniatiuft ,d«r luo- 
dorn« iAarxlPTTOi« ,w«lnher nnt Jsr "liil-: ^Oiiliit uns aialektisobou Liat«- 
riallGÄU« bornht, ^i\t ^Sne intcmf^tlonmlo Lchxö, die auf eigene 4it 
dio i^roDlnn© den soülmlen Lebens nnd dor >lJißsnfich^ift sowohl In aen 
LfeTiöorn d©s bestens nlB f»,Tioh Ses Osten« 15«fe^'' 

anä d9r;*n fl«« «as-tfiiis llejgt nicht ec &it* la TetaofilaÄon Äuaichtea, 
•OQdMo beruht ©rf liuer säa pt-reäulioäsß ^töiiuag: m« ru»dieotian 

masjsW.oha ibrttfSfk».« Th<ioratike* alad» regierenaon polltlechea 
Partei ,Wf»vn aln Ina Aualanci j^ö i;uu ai« es nloht sla iMnsel- 

Ungeheure Anstrengimgen v;erden vo den niss. Philosophen der MssenschaJTV g^fiacht, - ' 
auf Grund der modernen physik -3.11 sehen Entdeckungen die heuristische Fruchtbarkeit des 
dialektischen Materialismus; der sog'enaninten' dialektischen Llgik nachzu-'eisen, die 
doch nichts anderes darstellt als eine Naturphilosophie von'-^els und Lenin,die 

auf H gel zurueckgeht. ' '"• "v.'-^. • • *: *.. .. 

• im Aufsatz;'''Dialektiscrier V/iderspruch in Her'Quanttmimechanik" 

M.E,0me3i.;^owsky will zeigen.dass z.B. das von lliels Bohr augestellte Prinzip 

der Kompl^mentaritaet,. in der Quantummeclianik , demzufolge die Mikroteilcbön sov/ohl 
Korpuskular-als auch Welleneigenscl^fi^ften pffenbaren,nur auf dem dialektischen Prinzip 
des Widerspruchs s.exAei-. volle I^rlklaerung findet .Dieses Prinzip' »'böst-eht' in der An er 
krnnungin;j-der.^A|ierke|Tnung der geg^ sich gegenseitig aus schlies senden 

• ■. -•• ♦ /•;. 

Eigenschaften ,die alle natuer liehen Phaenomene und Prozesse- wie aitch'däÄ B^ike« 

j. J V 


und die Gesellschaft' offenbart »♦/ -^ sagt ^Öass^ schon der -^er st rx>bene^ P der 

• v ., . • 

>■ t : i ' 

Akademie Wawilow diesen dialektißch.en, Charakter der ^Ükroobjekte f es tg'est eilt. '^ sagte 

dass die ■korpuskulaten'urid 1^11 eneigensehaften der Ilaterie d ie ' Entgegengesetzten 

Äg3EZDBaöacßt}ga Aesserungen eines und des selben Eel Entitat sind.dass sie gleich "'• - 

zeitig in der' l%terie vorhanden sind. Nim hat die moderne Physife" auch eine Vielheit von 

und Komplerheit '■:•.•" 
EL ementart eilchen entdeckt. Die Begriffe der Eiern sntaxita et sind relativ Die Ouantum 


i< 1 

Physik ist durchdrungen von dia.'kt sehen Wid rspruechen ,si impliziert' die Anerkennung 

von "".^iderBpruectieörin den Na^txirdingen, ferner ihre V^areinigiing und gegenseitigen /.ü 6b er 

gang. die Loesung alter Widers und das Auftauchen neuer V/iders rueehe« ;• -•./;. 

. ■ . ■-.'** •■ • •■ 
S.T. Meliuö&i-n''.'Dialekt-.^iat-er..und die, philo sophischen^ ^rob.'i.enie des Ilikrokosmos 

weist darsLiifh:^ n/dtiss. Lenin, behcaupt et hsiit,dasj>5lektrjpn sei ebenso 'un.erschoepf lieh wie 

das Atom^ /'und. behauptete, dije Un^endlichk^Ji-derl^^ Idee 

. •. i:i-'.un:--rAr: "t-: '^y:«.-- Iv^; 'v:< :-jy:iv'' 'J-.>r ,'-••'-. ^ • .•' •'•.--..r- 
der ünerschöepfli<JlTi98tt':r^omplö3Ä-ts^^^^ ,4§sjakra}va smps.wuxxie zu?is.:.Gundstein der modernn 

^.jL^ r 

■r .::•••. 

Phzsik iihd wurde j^^fallg'enjein^ b^staetigt... .ViQle.GesetBe.4er. 9^ TJelt 

finden k line ■Anwnpdung.'auf den I'^krokosmos- und umgekehrt, \md die- Geiaretze der organischen 

Welt haben ihre Slgervstaendigkeit. Zu ihren EigenschrXten gebeert qualitative und nuanti 

Verschiedenlieit der 
tative Unendlichkeit. Die oua;itative Unendlichkeit der Matrie sehliesst aus die 

Existenz eines einheutlichen Gesetzes das die endguelt.'.ge Eigenschaft der Materie aus 

cken soll.Denn jede 3tuf e der VJiilclichkeit hat ihre besonderen Gesetze Bek nntlich 

suchte Ej-nstein nach eindem derarti^o. 


'^ einr 

Jene Froren die sich mit dem Problem des Wesen der nnendlichk-it der T^^^.terie befassen 
koennen a.ber nicht ubn einem ge^enbenen Augenblick endgueltig geloest v/erden 
Aber aiif joder Stufe der Forschung versucht versucht der dialektische Nateriaüsmus 
gewisse ^^.emente der absoluten Wahrheit aufzufinden, die im weiteren Fortschritt der 

. . . ■ r • ' ■ * 

Wissenschaf ji gebrr;iiciht..werd-eii kööfthen» '-'■■■- '''• -' * "''*'..,: 

r.' . .■ ■ :■* -y •■■••-■ '■ -. • ■' •■• '"■ "-• " ; ; 
^.V. Kopnin -erklaei^ dn' einem Aufsatz" Mat^iälist i sehe öi^^ Logik 

•«■•. :-[^'i,:,.- :^ ■ . V;- •■ ;.. 3;.:^r ••; .' ■. '-■■■■■♦ •■ ■ ■_ ■ ' ^ 

der modernen.. vdssen^chaftliöhen^EiAmcklu^ folgend V/as bef.iehigt 'die Dia;ektik 

> i r ""* * ' • 

f t *■ '-*■' 

dazu die: Logik des mod:>nen v^ssenschuftlichen Fortschritts zu seih? -£irs tens die 
Obj ktivitaet ihrer -Ge.set^e^pie Gesetze der Dialektik stii^<3h uebereiri mit 
den allgemeinsten Gesetzen der. Bewegung^ der Selbsftentv/icklung'^^def Phaenomene der 
objektiven Welt.Die Dialektik als Loc^ik der Mssenschaft verbindet die Objektivitaet 

d-eg' wissenschaftlichen ^jatuü Lta i Begriffe - tmd Theorien-mi^ ihJ*et lera^enderlichkeit und 


Fluidit aet. Ferner beweist die Didektik d ss es unmoeglic'^ ist eine objektive 

• < « 

Wahrheit festsustellen,die ueber hinausgeht» 

'••'. Denken ftat drei Stufen: die animalisch e.fdi mensch]J.che un^d der Ersatz der Denk 
■fÄehigkeit such I^aschinen.Hier offenbart sich Vernunft in re inster Form unbehindert 
diirch andere Faktoren! diesem Sinne ist eine Maschine, als. Form des- Denkens der 

^ 4^entr iitae^-' des Individuums u eb erl eg eri« ■ "'liie''matäria3i:sti'ä^c^ als Lorik 

wiir.deI^«^niBo jetischen. D-^n}cerrt. gruendlich bearbeitet.Kopniri zitiert "Die Grundsaetze 

.der dialektischen Logik von M, H, Rosental.," Di alktik und Logik vm B.M, Kedrow, 
die ,<io!s Ihstit^^ der Philosophie der Sowjet; Akadenie-- der v;i•s5JensCh'^ft;Bh•^' I962 

. veroef fantlicht vniiüe.Iiir zitiert auc-i die" Dialektik der Form des Denkens" von 

• ■ . • .. '• ' -^ • "-• • •• ■ 

,..M>N. Alexe jew; '•• ■ •=■ >-.■•' '^ 

Der bereits erwaehnte G.AVKursanov; in einem Aufsatz^' 'Die lof^isch'^n Grund 

- ■ ■ 4 , 

>. -» r I - — ^ • -■••»• - . • V • ■■ ■ ' 

■ ■ T ... .. ■•■.•."." ■ ,. '" ^ ,. .. ' . , ■' i ' 

...p. aetz^ der 'Jissenschaft weist daraiif hin, äass bereits Albert iilnseit ein beso deres 
Qewicht auf die logischen i'.omponenten der physikalischen Tlieorie le,rt,,'-uf den 
, ^usaraniQilhang zwischen Geometrie und Phzsikohne den er seine Theorie der Relativitaet 

,. -: 

■ '. ■ V 


nicht haette gru enden koennen, Niels rxDhr hat in -seinen Memoiren " uanturaphysik und 
Philosophie" die zuerst in russ, Spra(5he veroeff entlic vnirden,v ir^r ist auf die i'ot 
v/endirkeit der ^ellntorsiichung der logi sehen I'.onzepte in den versch edenen vn.ssan 
■'^ schaftlichen Sparten, A ch Werner ^'^eisenberg versucht die Bezinhung zwischen Phasik 

^-xichen Gleichung» 

-.nd -'Erkenntnistheorie zu bepruenden.I/ic uip ist aber vz-s die Anhaenp:er des dia;' ekt.-' sehen 

«i^ialasmus unter den ^d.ssenschaftlern darueber gesagt haben,, so 3.I.Ifed.low ,d8r 

«^emalige Pr-esident tor 3ov;jt, Akademie er *.iisnaisch.nften, Cr vervdes auf die Verknuep 

^ng Von Philoso -hie und Physik bei Galileo, DGn.ssenrii^Descart es Kepl^ar Newton Lomonossow 

^^endelei6w,Umow Planck Einst ein. V-.vilow hielt Redenndn denen er die !7iclitigkeit 

^ ülntvdck3.img der phzsikali sehen 

on Lenins Mat.and liinp. fuer die Wissenschaft betonte und vde idchtig die Ideen des 

^i-lekt Materialismus fuer die Wissenschaften im -H,^. ganzen sind. Juengst hat der 

i^mae-nische Pliilosoph A.^^oja (Zhozha) vorgeschlagen fuer die -dssensc-iaft ein 'lovu, 

Org:.non dialectum auszuarbeiten, de Hauptaufgabe eines derartigen Or^anon waere 

d.h. der Ic^ischeo Analyse der 'dssenschaft waere es das dynamisch e( dialektische) '-^esen 

^^^'esen der \dssenschaft3dchen Systeme zu f nden u d die !dttle und Kege einer v/eiteren 

fruchtbaren Entwickling der wissenschaftlichen liirkenntm^ der Welt zu entdecke, 

das I^fort "dialektisch" 
Idr sehen hier d-^.ss Krssanow etvjas scliam heft in Klammern setzt 

und es gevdsserm assen mi "d^Tisjausch" r.leicbsebzt, Wir koennen zu alldem nur bonerken 

<äass die meisten physikalischen Fortschritte der letzten Zeit durc Ma.enner erfolgt 

sind,die dazu keiner Stuetze durch den .die naturphilosophischen 3rlechtungen der mpiteria 

listischen Dialektik brauchten. 



Der Unterricht in der Philosophie -.var auf den rassischen Univer- 
sitäten von 1826 als staatsgefährlioh verbo;ien urd dann bis 1339 
stakk eingeschränkt .I^aher konnte sich in Rnssl-nd eine 3chul- 
pgilosophie keum ent-ickeln und was darüber veröffentlicht vrarde 
wurde meistens in ?orm von Liter-turkritik. und aeathetische Be- 
trachtung getarnt, -ies gilt von den den revolaUanären Demokra- 
ten i um die i,.itte des 19. Jahrhunderts v/ir Alexander "erzen, 
Baku-in, ilikolai .Tsohernjfsohewski.Belinskj , i^obrolubo.v .Cissarew 
u d anderen. Die Philosophie \TOrde also tatsachlich als staatsge^ 
fährlich unterdr ckt zuiaal die russischen Denker gerade den Ver- 
hältnissen in ihrem Vaterlande naturgemäss viel xlufiaerksaralLei 

widmeten. Als der aomenschriftateller Uogol seiin dichterischen 
Freund Puschkin Kapital aus den "Toten Seelen" .musste Puschkin 
lachen .sagte aam- aber "wie traurig ist unser Bussland" .Die 
russischen Zustände erklären aen Pessimismus des russischen Schrif 
tums.Alä die Kommunisten in Hussland zur Äegierung gelangten, woll- 
ten sie dies ändern und ein fröhliches hoffnungsvolles optimistl 
mistisches Schrifttum in Russland schaffen, ob v-ohl sich daraus 

etwas Verkrampftes entwickelte.Pröhlich ist es gewiss nicht gewor-j 

(. t t • 


.einflussreichen . „ , , / • / /-. r,«/ tq^^ 

Den ersten Denker Russland Piotr Tschada.lew ((1794-1856 

den ochelling als einen der bemerkenswertesten >nschen bezeichnet| 

die e denen er begenet war .wurde 1836 für wahnsinnig erklärt. 

Br konnte nur einen seinenr "Philosophischen Briefe" zu Lebzeiten 

herausgeben ur.d die Zeitschrift in der es tat wurde verboten. 

3r schilderte R^ussland folgsnderweise : "Zuerst brutale Barbarei 

dann roher Aberglaube ,dann grausame erniedrigende fremde fierr- 

aAhAft,„ein Geist den dann U: seren nationalen Herrschern ver- 


. ,. 3 

in Ihrer itraktar aafd Aafoaa vcXäCtiieüen waren, rrchort^o-^v, „^. • 

" * ueöertiragen von einem 

2am folgenden Zykla. wird wolil die ^eiotaug aber nioht die Lebens 
art.Sie waciiaen langsam, blähen kurz U:.d oterben.Die Germsnisch.loma.. 
nlsohe Zivilisation hatte i hre künotlerioChe Blute am 1700 
und wissenschaftlich i .1 19. Jahrhundert, wird aber von HUosland 
ersetzt werden. Spengler hat die Grenzen zwische n seine n sechs 


Zivilisationen schörfer erptrennt als Dnnilewsk3;. 

Das geistige Vorbild von der sogeanpnr.ten "orschheit der -/est 
liehen Kultur dürfte ebenfalls in der deutschen ^esr iff svelt 
liegen und zu russischem ^ebrauch adaptiert '"orden hielt 
Fichte in seinen i^eden an die deutsche Jgtion die deutsche Kultur 

-Wii?^'"^.P^S^j^"''^^^ die desWe.ta^ A.a^n.inte auch,dass 
^LeVii>chsein 1^ Stefr-^kter habe1r^§Tei^(fcut^nd sei. Diese 
Behauptung von der sittlichen ^eberlegendheit der Deutschen 

bez-. Gerrranen«°^e8inr^?et^°r?^BTe«-^*e?Trlfe°r^f^ö^r'|?°r^:^^ 5täm 

•9xinpu9MJ[9A «löp q.i93moii2op^ euieiJt ueufM U9^S9q 


IÜ9P q.fiu i[0Bjiii9 pirej i[oi •U93{OTnosnz3(onjnz q.9pu9Mj:9Axm i^oop imn gfs um 
' ii9q.iBi{9q3(onJ:nz X93{Tq.j:^ U9pu989TXi9q 9ip qoj eq^q q2tibi nznB 9i[BU"f9q 

•joqjtod JJÖH J9q.Jii992 j:i[9s 

im Littelalter gegenüber den '»Hörnern" .^ie& si d Ansichten die 

aas der ipatantike c-tam^nen durften and aas der x>ekadenz aea 

röniioolien -Vesena.Iia mag sogar einen richtigen Kern enthalten 

haben. Inzwischen haW^ch allerdings der otatas aer Wgermani.ohen 

Völker verschlechtert. Die Hassen werden offenbar in China ala 
sittlich unterlegen scheel angesehen. 

Aber nicht die mystischen* Slswophilen and Tonservativen ^7aren 
für die intpllektuelle .^ ^ukunft maasgebend sondern die viel 

•A'N 'LZ ^^ox M9N 

zahlrei(;^.^§j^e^n^|^r^^|j5^^|ttler, deren Ihnen even anter den er-vähnten 
Hegelianern -^^li^fSVrf^Flügels "aren,die spi.ter die lüaterialioti- 
sehe Philosophie Ladv.ig i^eaerbacha bevorzagten. ooi.zWuoHd.px 

Süäter gewann anter aen IntellektaeiT^n'^^aiTo^ach 
Feaerbaoh- Karl Marx und Friedrich 5ngels - d.h. dip za "Lq-rxi^te 

gewordenen Junghegelianer einen Anhang in Ha^s 

gar keinem Zweifel, dasa der Larxismaa anter der rassischen Intelli 
genz eine viel zahlreinh« r^h v^^ 

zaaireiche -nhungerschaft hatte als in allen 

Ländern, ^7eil die bestehenden ZUotl^nde ihnen unbefriedigend schie- 
nen. Zn diesen Marxisten gehörten "^Ir^eohanow.Boordanow. .ikselrod 
und sohliesalioh "aadimir TLJanow h.d. Lenin. 

Die Erneuerung ,der Ausbau und die Verbreitung des dialektischen 
Ilaterialismus war ein wichtiger Wendung in der Philosophie des 
20. Jahrhunderts. Dies war das ^'ferk Lenins, nicht seiner sozialisti 
sehen Gegner in I?ussland.Der dialektische Haterilaismus den "'arx 
schuf und Lenin erneuerte heisst entweder iiaexismus oder Leninis 
mus oder üarxionius-Leninismus 

Der dialektische i.IaterL laismus der im 19. Jahrhundert entstand 
hatte eigentlich seine Anhänger nur in der sozialistischen Partei 
d.h. der Sozialdemokratie in Deutschland ,aber auch diese Anhän 
ger Schaft war nicht allgemein und schwächte sich ab. Auf den 
Lehrstahlen der Universitäten konnte er schon aus politischen 
Eücksiohten in Deutschland krine Anhänger haben, denn sie wären 
nie zu den "Lehrstühlen zugelassen worden. Aber auf der '•'ende 
des 19. zum 20 Jahrhundert entstanden auch in Deutschland auch 
innerhalb der Sozialdemokratie Bewegungen ,die ihre Ideologie 
von dem dialektischen -ateri-, ismus entfernten. ;3olche Parteimit 
glieder wir Eduard Bernstein wurden ileokantianer uiid die fuhrenden 
ITeokantianer wie ^ermann Joheu uad £arl Vorländer der sozieldemo 
kratischen Partei eib. ?riearich Adler in Oesterreich näherten 
sich dem Positivismus und m..Iach uad Avenarius. 
Uan sagte damals in sozialistioohen ITr eisen, dass :.:ach"das für die 
Naturwissenschaften gemacht hat was "-'arx für die dozialwissen 
sciia-ften. Anaere Sozialdemokraten wie Siegfried LIarck v/urden 
l^euhegolianaer ur.d Karl Kaatsk^; ,ein andere sozialistischer Theore meinte, dass es für die 3ef eiung aes Proletariats gleich- 
giatig istm wie sie philocophisch begrunaet w,ird , materialistisch 

kantisoh oder chi.i .tlich.^r betr chtete aas Wesen aes.i.iar xismus 
nicht als Philosophie sondern als Sozialtheorie. 

In Russland lagen die Dinge anders .Gerade als man sich in 

die meohanistiooh« Jetarauffaasung.In seiner phllc iorhischen Tätig 
keit spielte 1909 die ä^uptrolle.als er gegen die abtrünnigen 
i-Wxisten das Buch 'T.Brxlsms urd grapiriokritizisrns" herausgab. 
l«Iarxiomus triuinphierte in der "artei seit Lenin. Aber schon während 
seines Lebens aberauoh besonders nach seinen Tode traten 
2v;9i Abv/eichungen vom "arxismus auf den -lan .eiaeraeits eine 
Biohtung zum neohanistischen --ateriaiismus ,die .. .J.Buoharin ver- 
tratfgeb. 1888) und eine zum dialektischen Idealismas , die A,Ä, 
Beborin vertrat • (1331) Der erstere behielt den ^.^aterialismus aber 
Vf^rviarf die dialektische LIethode:;.der zweite behielt die llethode 
aver vervyafr den ' ater ialis .^us. Diese beiden Abweichungen verwafr 
3talin u^id bewirkte ,dass in Bu^sland die Philosophie wieder 
auf die Linie Uarx-iingels -"enin zurückkehrte. 

Gie i'ätigkeit dieser bciaen MiixjVxiQi bildet des 
nierk\7ürdigste dohauspiel in der <ie^.chichte der rhilc^ophie 
dass nämlich sie sowohl die politischen als auch die philosophisch 
Führer des i-andea waren. Selbst wenn msn zu Ilaro iurel zurückkehrt 
gibt es kein derartiges ochauspiel denn Marc Aurel versuchte nie 
das philosophische System der Stoiker den rönischen Beich als 

bindende Doktrin aufzuzwingen und n^ch deren Idealdie itr^atsein 

Roms , , . >jf t T 4.--« 

richtungen zu gestalten. Lenin uad itaiin -.-urden die eotalter 

der Ihilosophie in au£Siand>iageiich aber auch die politischen 

Fahrer des i-andea ,die Begründer der grbasten Partei der 'elt, 

die Anführer der grössten Revolution in geschichtlichen -^eiten 

tt-.d die Bildner des Sowjetstaates und seine ersten Theoretiker 

3ies ist ohne Beispiel in der Geschichte. , sie vollbrachten ein 

theoretisches und ein praktisches .'erl: zugleich.Henr:; L.Hoberts 

der Direktor aes "Institute on üaat central üurope" an der Oolun 

üla U ivcrsität meinte ...einte in einer Bespr..ohung (Lez.26 19Ö5 

Lenin scheint ÖSStimiat i3i.<:ÄiiS;»ei'^Q '^^^ gro.=,sen ^eH&i^SÄ^^^^^ 
wie liapoleon und BisLiarok za werden 

» wr 

auf die nian i,:aner wieder 2ur ,. okiiOLmit and die inan inimer .vieder untersaoht 
I-enin war ein 3ohriftsteller von beiapiellooer potenisoher Gewalt 
"ie sie seit Luther und Volta re kaum in ::;uropp vorh?:^nden war, aber 
er ist mit ^t-^.lin kein politisie:t;^ender ^liilo^^oph .ondern eher 
ein philosophierender -oLitiker ,denn er hat wenig Originelles zum 
^^psrungliohen Marxismus beigetragen. 

Jiwohl i.^arx als auch iingels^v/areü in den vi- rziger Jähren 
<i6s 19. Jahrhunderts ^inkshegelianer ,d.h. politisch bürgerli he Demokraten. 
u.xd Anhi;:nger der Hegeischen i^ialektik einer Methode des jenkens 

^as eine hi torisoh-evolutionäre Ansicht der menschlichen esellschaft 

ff • 

ULd Geschichte a .nnahin,aber nicht sein 3:7Stem. Diese Dialektik d.h. 
evolutionäre 'Teltansioht der Geschichte schien dazu geeignet eine 
'"äffe zur Bekämpfung der feudalen Despiotie in Deutschland m- d die 
Verteidigung der Interessen der deutschen Arbeiter vor kapitaljsti 
scher Ausbeutung und diesen Institutionen. Das materialistische Motiv 
nahm Marx eher aus der Philosophie Lmvig ü'euerbacha,aber dieser war 
nicht genügend, denn i::; Gegensatz zu i'euerbach der sich als gesitiger 
iv'atur forscher erklärte, wollte ^arx eine l'heorie begründen, die eine 
Führer im politischen ^ampf werden sollte. Marx v/urde ein Xoramu ist erst 
während seines ßxils in Frankreich und führte 1844 die Begriffe des 
''-^roletar:i-iats" un der "/olksmasse'* ^in ,wohl unter dem Einfluss der 

dfranzöoischen ^Kommunisten und .Soz;ialisten,iängela wurde es in England. 

Lenin behauptete auch dass der -"Marxismus die edelste Blüte des Denkens 

.sei,ei.i i^rgebnis des der deutschen Philccophie ,des französischen So 

ziali^mus und der englischenjL^ationalö*äeine ILampf gegen alle 

nicht marxistischen PhönomenoicgioChen, positivistischen Theorien is 

daraus begreiflich , weil er diese Theorien als eine Schwächung der kämpfe 

Tischen Slemente im ^arxismus gegen die gegenwärtige Gesellschaft betrach 

te te« 

aeiu p,9lemUch9S araudwerk i.t das 190b 11909) g 

•■ ^ - vmräe zum Vorbild aller Angriffe aer 
rien hfrlltiörig naohapurte.^» wurde zum 

3ow.3etphilosophie auf die westliche Philo„op 

.enins .iCtigste ....ndL.ngen ausser de. er...nrten Buo • s. ^. 

..eilen und drei Bestandteilen des und "Bie Histor.s .en 

T ,.« von Knrl i-'-rx 'Haoh seine... Tode (1870.1924) 
-r.u4 r»i'-oi p dpr Lehre von J^arx j-^ 

. nc,P9/30 u>d 1933 sein. "Philcsophiso.en MefUi nic^ofo^Lie 
wurden 1929/30 x.a 1^0«:^ =:» 

. . '.■'Uröffentlicht. tehin ^.at die eri.enntnistheoretischen und 
<pietr?»ävl ver OXIS n^i 1.x oiiü« ^ ^ 

-^- " w^dfe^'^'arxismuaetiWlökelt^und xhn 

die metliodologischen uruudla-geii ubs - , 

sogenannten j^g^iianiua d.h. 'in der'T^t -^om 

.. •ii^tiaöhen Hihlliamua und äkeptiziamtis: abgetrennt 
erkenntnisth9ori,etiac,^en ßiraiJ- , ^ru^5^,+tt- 

' ' >- '- . v„v-,i-a f.phre oder Posi^*4 

sondern von allen .^enen ^ enthiilter^uud .uch 

vismua solche Elemente zu enthalten acaxene 

,. <q«-^ vpine Gruidlagen für aie 

vom mechanlatischen KiT..teriallsmuB. der kexne 

-r-K .ntwioklm.g füx die besetze des Viandela enthielt . 
historische ^ntwioklm.g ,£ ^^ 

.talin sagte ^^.; ^^^ ..^^^ glaube .dass Lenin f .t 

.i.mus".eine neuen' .rauds.tze hinzufügte^ genau... v-ie^er^auo 

.. T«nin mr u d iat der treueste 
-> ■j^r.+'cf'^ jAndarte« Lenin w »* ^--^ •^*-'*' 
keinen '^alten Graudsatz anaer T>e. 

M ^.r 11 .d 3ncrela,'=*er sich voll una 
und konseicienteste schaler von , , , ^.„ht 

• ,.^^<= iiQ atutzp.ilber Lenin v;ar nlcin; 
^^nz auf die Prinzipien des ..^arxis us stutz. A 

... ,.r Lehre von Uarx-Sngels sondern gleichzeitig 
nur ein Vollstrecker der Lenre vcn 

,,. .„ns,uer...3r e.U-U.elt, ..l..r .i. ----.eis .eKr . 
P3=3.e =ie a.n neuen .n.,lon«ns...ain^n^n an .de, neuen .nt-.o.- 
":!...»». n.n,Xi». a.3 xnpe..s..n.. Xnae. e. au .e.e „«.en. 

. . ^« des ..aerKismus hineingetragen irr. /er- 

neuea zum gemeinsamen .chatz Vergleich zu dem 

bleich zu dem .as Marx und Angela gegeben hatten.xm Vergle 
^ , n-ti^chen -eriode dea Kapitalismus gegeben .ein 

was in dem vori -.periali^ti^chen 


kennt .llan kann sie dies lediglich mit der itelLung des nicäischen 
Bekenntnisses im kptholisohen und orthodoxen J .r-itentum des 4.urd 
S.Jfjhrhui derta vergleichen. ATaer dieses stützte sich auf Glauben 
der Marxismus Leninismus stützt sich auf '.Viisen .es behauptet dies 
zumind zt. Dies ergibt sich aus fplgenden Aesserungen xsas. im 

darjmelwerk "ili.t rischer Uateriaxiomus" (lotoriceski.j meter ialiszm) 

der jo.'jetu-iion 
das 19554 von d§r Akademie der Wissenschaften in ...oskau herausgegeben 

zwei ,ahre _ . ^ i.a 

wurde-alöO naoh^ dem Tode dtalina -von iM. i-onotantinow 

"der hiazorisohe Llaterilismus iat eine vollkommene und wohlbegründete 
wissenschaftliche Theorie, die die Entwicklung der Gesellschaft ,deu 
Uebergang von einer sozialen Struktur zur anderen erklärtOeite 6). 
Der Verfsser beruft sioh dsbfii «uf Stplins "Me ökonomischen Probleme 
des Sozialismus in der 3o^,jetuaion (1952)"Die verschiecenen sozialen 
Formationen -'erden in ihrer ökonomischen 3nt-icklung nicht nur durch 
deren spezifische ökonomischen >setze beherrscht, aondern auch durch 
die ökonomischen Gesetze, die allen i^ormationen gemeinsam sind, so z.B. 
das Gesetz ,dosa die Produktionakräf te u.d die Beziehungen der Pro- 
duktion in einer integralen sozialen Produktion vereinigt sind 
und das Gesetz und das besetz ,v/elches die Beziehungen zv/ischen den 
Produktionskrüften iund den Produktionsbeziehungen im Prozess der 
Entwicklung aller sozi-len Formationen gilt.i)ie iozialformationen 
sind also voneinander nicht nur untereinander durch ihre eigenen 
ökonomischen Gesetze unter acheidbar sondern auoha.ter einander 
v.rbuaden durch die ökonomisoheu *esetze die allen sozialen Pormatio 

nan gemeinsani sind. 


er croduktiv- 


krafte ,das Gesetz von aar OöStiini^enüen Holle der ökonomisohen 
^ru..dlaga 2urn Jam sozialen Ueberbaa; des Grei^ei,^; der sozialen 
^evoiationen im Prozeas aea '^ebergangea von einer aozialökonoinisohen 
otriüctur zur anderen, zu einer anderen uud eine i^eihe anderer 

I^iese angeblichen Gesetze haben diea Gemeinsamea,daaa sie keine sind. 

Die Existenz dieser Gesetze wird von xliohtniarxisten nicht 

anerkennt und im naturwissenachaf tliohen 3inne sind dies keine 
besetze Ui.d bilden auch zusamrnengenoramen keine naturwissenschaftliche 
Th^^orie. Wir kennen keine historischen besetze ,v.'enn -'eiche existieren 
l^i^a hinderte aber lonin nicht an der Erklärung: Seit den Bracheinen 
dea "Ilapital'V ist die.naterialiatls^he- -Ge&chi-aht»a.uf-f«aa^mg ke-ine- 
blo^se Hypothese mehr ,3onaern eine wissenschaf ti.ich bewiesene l^heorie 
Die meisten Philosophen der Vergangenheit --ollte eine objekti- 
ve Philosophie , Lenin verlangte ihre ^'Parteilichkeit" , denn nur in der 
Parteilichkeit kann sie richtig sein,ne.:mlich wenn sie den Standpunkt 
der Arbeiterklasse sich zum ihrigen macht .Unpar:eilichieit ist eine 
bou bürgerliche Idee und überdies unmöglich, denn in dieseJ^UnpeJsönlich- 
keit verfolgt jedermann seine eigenen Interessen. Alle diese Ansichten 
sind aus der Xampfnatur Lenins heraus und aer kommu..i. tischen ot&atsthe- 
orie erklärlich, auch sein polemischer ''eist, d.h. sein cätil entapricht 
dem. Obwohl philosophisch angehauchtwar Lenin und auch 3tp.lin kein Lehrer 
sondern ein^cjohriftaAel.lejr.un^ Journalist von %ruf^ 

Die Gru ithese dea ""arxiamua Leninismus in der ^rkenntnia 
theorie ist die nnahme das die '^©It wirklich und real iat-daaa sie 


kein Gebilde unserer Vorstelluigen ist wie etwa Schopenhauer u 

Ilealis'en annehmen. Sein geht von jöäx Denken. Die z veite Theöe 

l'iutet,dass wir diese Virklichkeit oder Jatur erkennen können, wir 

wissen nicht nur,daas sie existiert ,aber wir erkennen auch wie öie 

i:.t.3ie ist also kein unerkennbares Ding an sich .Die '7elt ist nicht 

ein Gebilde des Denkena öondern unser Denken ist ein -rodukt der ^'^elt 

der "elt 
ijie iinne vermitteln die V/elterkenntnis.Dir Zrkenntnii ist möglich 

UDd wirklich aber nicht vollkommen, sie entwickelt sich i.. Zuge der 


äer 'Vlsaeriöohaf t. Das aophisma der Idealisten and der ideaiistisohen 

^haeuom- nologen besteht darin ,da33 sie die 5inne als eine Barriere 
ansehen, die uns von der ?/elt trennen, anstatt sie als Lllttel anzusehen 
das uns mit der Welt verbiMdet.Jeder 'Erblindete , .Jeder Taubgewordene 
v;eis3 dies., nur die idealistischen Philosophen v;ollen es nicht nissen. 

Die Wirkliohkei t ,die Welt, der --ensoh sind körperlich, aber 
diese Körperlichkeit hat viele Entv/ioklungsphasen und erzeielt im Gehirn 
apparat die Eigenschaft des Bevjusstseins. .Auf dieser Höhe hat die 
Materie,der itoff die Fähigkeit die Welt zu widerspiegeln, ijies ist 
eine natürliche und zugleich wissenschaftliche V/eltanaciauuag.Idealismua 
ist ".'eder wissenschaftlich noch natürlich und er entstand nur dank den 
aniiiio tischen Tendenzen der Heligion.iusserdem i;3t der philosophische 
Idealsimus reaktions^r und sozial mit der Heaktion verbunden, er dient 
der herrschenden Klasse , indem er die xkufmerkasamkeit der i^^assen von 
realen Aufgaben ablehnt und sie auf iaeale Inhalte richtet. 

Die These aes Materialismus in der /ergangenheit, war dass die 
x^atur ein toter ..ieohaniümus iöt;iing gen war die These des i^eninismus 
dass die L^aterie versdheiaene Jeo alten annii jLt ,aass oie d> ss aber 
die I:iin2 elwi3sensohaften,Ph:;sik, Chemie , Biologie und Psychologie diese 
Eigenschaften feststeilen, nijht die Philosophie. 

Der Leninismus wandte sich ^e^en den mechaniscti.:chen Meter ialis'us 
der die Unterschiede in der Welt nivelliert und die ^''elt toten Dingen 
anähnelt .Nicht alle Prozesse in der "'elt sind mechanistisch. Die 
Behaviorosten verstehen den ^-enschen mechanistisch u d daher fanden sie 
bei den i'^8rxisten-x.eninioten keine Gegenliebe .^er Marxismus nimmt 
3toff ""eit und Haum als zueinander gehörig und miteinander verbunden 


an. iJr verwirft sowohl die Verabsolutierung des I;eumea ausserhalb 
des otoffes und die sub.i'ektive /Ansicht vo m Baum im iinne Kants 

Die sogenannten Klassiker des "'-rxismus,d.h. Uarx 3ngels und i^enin 
verwarfen die Anschauung dass die .Veit unveränderlich sei. die 
befondeV sicfi^i?^''Sfe8fifift^^Wnndel,difl Ansicht dosa sie unwandelbar war, 

i3 t eine Ansicht des alten '''cterialis mus,die aes aialektischen lau- 
tet dahin, fass sie steen Wandlungen unterliegt u.d sich in Evolution 


bsuf inuet . 

Die nichtigsten Sru .ds.t.e der diale.tisol.ea .eltansoh.uung 
lauten folgendermcssen. Me E.acheinu .gen bedingen einander, ea gibt 
k ine isolierten Gegenstände in der Jatar.iie ^^^^'--^.^läse^tigen 
sel.irLung and die dialektische l^ethode siehr sie in dieser er.nupft 
heit.Ea gibt y.eine Hahe.astand in der /clt wechaolbn einander ab, 
Sie ent.ioi.eln and erneuern .ich,die einen enden.. - anderen begingen 
dl. dialei.tiaohe -ethode sieh, die ^inge in .etur 
erscein-ongen aaoaen .an.ohs. i^leiue Wa.a.aagen,aie 
i .aer grösser aad .esen.lioh werden,.ie schlagen von blc.s .uantirativen 
in .aelitetive Unterschiede am.Dieee .ialitativen unterschiede er- 
folgen m .prüngen,plöt.lich,von einem Zastand in den anderen, 
.ios .ar eine philosophisch. These Friedrich "inen derartigen 
Sprung bildet der 'Te.ergang von der anorganischen .ur organischen :iatur 
.0. unb.-.3sten zur Be^^s.theit .i-.^.ti. ist eine Pghilo.ophie 
.er M.tontuint.t ,dia dialektische -.thode versteht die Be.egu.g 

. ^tPta neue u-litüten schafft und zu einem stets höheren 
dahin, dass sie stets neue ,u.-i.i.oo 

. ^ -f^t Dpn 3wünßen in der ..atur entsprechen die Hevolu 
Stufe fortschreitet. Jen apruugi.ii 

tionen in der sozialen Snt-.äciaung. 

,ie Il^tur innere -ide .rsprUche . vor allem deswegen,dass die 
...:ic._lang stets neue Gestalten mit den früheren im -.-i der 
3.... .ind.daher besteht ^ampf ..sehen dem absterbenden u.d dem .euen 

^ r-.f oiiaet die ^rcevbkraft der ^atur den Inhalt aer .nt.vic.lan 
pi^^oer x*aiiip^ ui-Lac.v< u.j.v^ 
^U dl^- lettische ...thoae l.t daU.r ,ln. -e.^.c.e HUlcophle de. „laer- 

l.or i.. a» .r.prunslice .a..aud.aUs,.c sind »e.und^. 

.. AiA^ V. vn-p ev'iß.Lcnin h-t daher die 


iet absolut wie die ^ewQaOng die Bntwioliluag die 3ev/egang i.-t. 
•^'^as Bngela an \7iderapr Hohen in der x^atur sah, entdeckte l.Iarx ebenfalls 

in der Gesellschaft« imd in der sozialen Strulitur, 

in der Erscheinungen 'Wechsel 
Im Kampf der Gegensätze anterliept Je-e Erscheine^ing 

w ird 

.jede früher oder später negiert ,v/idersi"^rochen, , aber diese Ilegation 
wird ax^äter elDonfalls negiert, ^.^as dann folgt ist eine Art R'j.o.jkkohr 
zum früheren Zustand, aber nicht auf der gleichen, ^onaern auf einer 
höheren Stufe.. Die 2ntv;icklung,sögt Lenin, v/ieder holt die 
durohr:mchten btofen ..aber auf einer höheren r.bene*.-cie hat die 
Gestalt einer Spitrale . ^/;ienn man io sagen dardf, nicht einer geraden. 
Dia ^ntwücklung enterfolgt in Sptüngen,3r ist ist katastrophenartig 
revolutionc ttres sind IT: terbrechungen in der l-ontinuitL'.t ;die ITm-vandiung 
der .^uantitut in s^ualitätdls inneren Entv/icklungsiii.puice ,die aus den 
Widersprüchen folgen, aus dem ZUoammenprali u.^d i'end€nzen,die innerhalb 
einer liroolieinu -g oder in einer Gesellschaft v.iricen, ;die gegenseitige 
Abhängigkeit ur.d die . .u.xzerreibare ^usam..enhang alier Jeiten einer 
jEirscheiaung(^ der die beschichte stets neae »ieiten abgewinnt ) die 
Verbindung die die einzige geaetamässige V/eltbewegungsprozess schafft 

dies sind einige 2iuge der Dialekti^c die umso inheltsreicher ist als 
als die gewöhnliche Sfvolutionslehre.'' 

Im Prinzip v/ar die dialektische Philosophie Lenins die gleiche 
wie die von -'^arx und '3ng'-ls,aber L^nin mu?.ste die geistigen Strömungen 
berücksichtigen oder sich ihnen auseinandersetzen, die seit Engels 
in der ^'>elt auftraten. Zu diesen Theorien gehörte der evoiutionc^.re 
POoitivismus von .ipencof uad die positivistische relativistische 
Anschauung von ^Naturgesetzen. Der ...arxisraus war zwar evolutionis tisch 
aber in einem anderen 3inne. Spencer hat letzten iSndes alles aufs bleiche 
'zurii.ckgeführt und die ewige Identiti-t der '"elrt anerk,?nnt .der llarxisti 
sehe ßvolutionismus ,der dialektische bestritt diese •^dentitt.t u. d v/ies 
auf jev.eilc neue Erscheinungen I^rscheinungen hin, hier bestand die 

^nt^'icklurg in Icr ^^Sohcpfung von neuen Formen., dem ^trf-ll '^«^ 
Alten und Aufsteigen von niederen zu h^^heren formen. 


Die Ansicht ,drsa die •ri.ssnsoli.ft stets nar .aantitativa Unter schiede 
bezw. Za.iGa-'en5.etzungen behandelt wa de veruaiat ,3ic= bekLjnpfte 
die v'er absolut ierurtg der Zahlbenverhiltnisse ,die die noderne Physik 
betrieb und. erklärte iaantit-aive Bestimmungen ohne Beruck.ichtisung 
der •ualitätsunt^röchiede als ungen.lgend.^ie H:ype-rtrophi^. der .-athematik 
v;arde verworfen. 

Die iteLIun 
Ilin,^ichu re voiationLr 

b einer Airualiirien v^areu tr 

iei:tioOheu^ war in .ozialer 

t in' inteij.x:4ctaelier nipsioht. 7iel 

' ... , 

11 ab. rj-ief crangsmäcäig.iir verteiaigte 

den Begriff des -aturge setz es gegenüber aer ikepöis aer iooitivisten 
3ine ^eöohreibur.g (Deskriptiou) genügt nicht, aie VJi.senöOhaft 
bte'icht -rkläru.gen und die gibt es nicht ohne -esetznt.sigkeiten. 
Die -elehrtsn haben die .'esetze als .mbiektiv oder konventionell auf. 
gc-fasst. als ein Gedankending ohne -rrirklichkeltssubstrat .Der ^-arxiams 
Lenini3-U9 betonte die Obiektivitj't der -aturhesetze. ., 

Sr verv/arf auch den Dualis-^nus einer mteriallen und geistigen 
V/elt,eine üelt und Ueber.elt xmtur u.a .ilulfur eil die "irkiichkeit 
materiell und dialektisch i.t.iie gleiche -ethode vie zur .«atur wurde 
zur menschlichen ^esellaohaft angev.-eudet -Marxens ^eiapiel.Auf den 
dialektischen "atJrialis us stutzte ^sich^der^hi.torische^..a^^ 

^ ^ ^ *■ ^A ■?>+- MßT-,-nnnK die i^etar.die vom I.Ien3ohen 

u .bh..X6ig existiert Das 3u bjc-kt i.t ein Te 1 der llatur ,.'rkenntnis 
beruht auf ist eine Widerspiegelung der ^atur 
es iot richtig wenn ea mit aer -ator übfcreinstir.;rüt, 

Kosmologisohidie ^atur i.t materiell. .aber verschiedenartig 
und steigt von dtufe zu höherer .tufe auf., lab, von .otem itoff zum 
lebendigen und bewussteu.iie uJt.rliegt Gesetzen uuu jeae ihrer Stufen 
^d Gestalt unterliegt eigenen ^esetzeu.^ies betrifft auch die Gc- 
sell30haft,die .virt.r,ohaftliohen ^iesetzen uuterliegt.die sind 
ebenfalls dialektisch, bezvjichnun'-'i'pndlungrn und ümatiirze ,uie. zu 

ets häheren Formen fuhren. Die Phii.Ooophie miioS eberifalls dialektisch 
^^>^ie kann nur dann wahr öein,7;enn öie mit der dialektioohen d.h. 
erspraohovoiien and omotarzvolien ^atar der V/irkiiohkeit rechnet 
2\var oowohi der auobermenooiiiiohen als aach der mencOhliohen Virk 
Qhkeit.i;ieiie "öiaieiLticOhe Philosophie i^t eine iPorm ues i^aterialis 
f^^sa .r sie warf dem alten meohanistisohen Materieiiomas vor ,dass er 
Werder die Vielfalt der Formen der Wirklichkeit und deren besondere 

esetze vernachlässigte ,wdeil er nnhiitor isch war,dsss er abstrakt 
war and den ^'^ensohen als unveränderliches ^^esen ?nsah ,ob'^'Ohl er durch 
aie sozir^ipn :3ntwicklung sich ebenfalls -tets wandelt. Dem alten -^^terial 
smus v;ar er Llensch zu abstrakt behrmdelt und xKrferat ersetzte derart 
die irjraicsk^it durch abstrrikte oohemen. 

Die russische Philosophie hat zv;ar einen gewaltigen Aufschwung 
in znhlenmäosiger Hinsicht genommen. i^is gab nienals so viele Professoren 
der '^hilsophie in Hussiand wie heute und es wurde niemals soviel Philo 
Sophie gelehrt. Auch die ^ahl der rhilosophischen Zeitschriften ist 
gr0o3,die wichtigste ist »'Woprossj? Filossofii"obwohl es auch andere 
gibt, es gibt auch ^ei tschriften, die sich mit gewissen "Teilgebieten der 
Philosophie z.B. mit der Aesthetik bescht.f tigen.-üie russischen ij'achphilo 
oophen sind nicht cO sehr originelle Denker als Kompilatoren , Kommenta- 
toren und Glccsatoren des i^iarxioiaus i-euiuiomus wie ihn italin wiederum 
kommentiert und erklärt hat./or allem sina aie i:iUöc-en Historiker aer 

• • • 

Phil^ ::.ophie und des -Marxismus insbesonuere .Da die dialektische Philo 
sophic des ...arxismus zur Grundlage der iteatsordnung erklärt w-irde, 
mu-.stfi die Philsophie studiert werden und z-ar hpt die marxistische 
?hil030r:hipgps0 iohte besonders dipienigen l?r sc he innigen ihr Augenmerk 
zugewendet, die zum naterialismus geführt h^ben oJer m.ateria lis tisch 
waren denn dies waren die Vorstufen des '.^arxismus. Ju oolchen zahlen oie 
im Altertum i;emoi^rio ,iipikur ,die AufklorurigsphilOoOphen aer Jeuzeit, 
Spinozn , Hegel , Besonders i^udwig Feuoroach. Jat rlich wird der oOge 
nnten idealistischen Philosophen zwar als historische iirscheinu igen 
gelehrt ab<^r ver-orfen,denn .jede Konzentration auf fdas sogenannte 
Uei .tige es sei dies im platonischen neoplatonischen oder moderneren 


31nnG oind v-rworfrn, Liese An-olmaungcar t h^t zur VernrohlUisigang 

öllr-r philoaopüisohen 3trömnng<^n geführt, die in der z:'Piten Ililftf' 
des 19.Tohrhu dPTts -ilsc n-^ch 1343 bestfxnden hqbpn und nioht morxisti.o 
\7aren, v/eil sie pla reaktionTr g^ltpn.")i^ niohtn^rxiotiiohen materiali 
oticohen un dernokratisohen x^hllOoophien i:tiiöclarids also der ^og. 
revoIationLren Demokraten wurden anerkannt aiö vorluafer des ^-^arxiomaa 
v^eil damals in "^iissland der --arxicinus noo'i u. bekannt war. 

Die sogen.?innte Dialektik ist ein :irbe ^iegels und es wird 
dem //estlichen Denker p:erade das 3erauhen der ru^s .Philosophen fremdartig 

c - 

anmuten alle neuen wissenschaftlichen iintdeckungen.d.h. neue 'üheorien 
die man nicht vervv^erfe kann weil oie exakte «^'issenschaf t cina in das 
dialektische Thema zu zwängen. iJie x;ialektik,aie keine ^7iosenoChaf t 
sondern eine uesondere uhilOoC4)hische Au^ciiauung der kOömischen uad 
sozialen jarscheinung n ioT.,wird als '^wis^oenechaftlich" angesehen. Ihnen 
verfliessen aie Grenzen zwischen marxi-i^ftischer L/islektik und //issen- 
sc'ieft.Am schwächsten sind die russischen Philosophen auf einem Gebiete 
8Uf dem der V/esten d.h. England und ^merika vergleichsweise am stärk- 
sten sind, nämlich auf dem Gebiete der Wissensc'hsftstheorie '"issenschaf t§ 
kri^ik und moderner Logik, die aber j^tzt in Hussland "Eingang gefunden 
hat,eber nicht auf der philosophischen a sondern auf der mathematischen 
Abteilung der U niversit ' ten.Die se Lchgi ist nLmlioh nicht aialektioCh 
und sie muss berücksicht .t werden, wenn sie Erkenntnisse geheiligt hat 
Man rettet sie dso dass man sie in die uathematik einreiht, wo sie 
ideologisch sterilisiert wurde .Die steigende Liberalisierung nach dem 
Tode Jtr;lins er^rbit sich nicht etwa aas irgendwelcher ^enderung der 
Grundpinzipien der marxistischen Thilcsophie ,sinaern darin, dass sich 
die russischen l'hil oophen mher r.iit denjenigen Jparten beschäftigen, 
die sie bisher ignoriert oder nur kritisiert haben ohne sie dargestellt 

zu haoen.^c gibt an der ...Ookauer itaatsunversität nemnea M.V .^om.onossov/ 

1- .■» i ' > 
innerhalb der philOoOphicChen iTakUolt einen be^onaeren Lehrstuhl für 


Philosophie, za den; z.B. der bekannte Ill.torikar deiatöoher Aesthetik 

V.P.Asmus gehört, iJi^ser bes^-^rioht z.B. in den "^Tisaenoohaftliohen Bei- 

trcgen aer höheren 3ohale"- Philc^ophi^ohe Ji^senöohaftentor .1 ,1965 ) 

zucitimiüend ein Baoh von Y.V.iokolow über einen der Lieblingen der 

•^Owvjetphil:.oOphie B.dpinoza ,der natürlich üi alo '»fortsohrittlioher 

Denker" beiraohtet wird. In derselben ^eitsohtrift ITr.l ,1962 Teilt 

der Logiker M.ll .Alexe.jew (Universität Moskau namens Lomonossow ( mit 

es d .3 die philoiophiiohen ^eitsohrif ten fWopros^ Filossof.ji and 
Filosaofskije Ilaoki s sehr wenig auf dem C^ebiet der Logik publiziert 
haben, dasa di^s anders werden muss und die neuesten Errungenschaften 
dieser 'Wissenschaft den russischen -Pädagogen insbesondere zugänglich 
gemacht werden, dcss der logische Unterricht -und z;/ar die dalektiache 
Logik, die klissische -^ogik und die mathematische Logik eine gröoseren 
Plstz an en ^Hochschulen einnehmen müssten und eine aer Logik gewidmete 
Zeitschrift "Wopros^; Logiki" geschaffen werden müsse. 

Gerade hier handelt es sich im eine Sparte die im "festen und 
nach Betrand Bussel sogar d^s Teaen der Philosophie ausmacht die 
als mathematische oder symbolische Lceik an den llochschulen dein ngland 
und Amerika dv^ohl der den Hauptgegenstand des Unterrichtes bildet 
Ja, die i^i Westen Untersuchungen der Semantik ,der Linguistik, 
d.h. der Begriff sforsohung und dprachfor3chu..g gehen letzten Endes 
auf diese logis^ ..UntersuchUugen zurück .La sie aber mit aer dogenannten 

dialektischen Logik-die kei ;e i»ohgik sondern eine Philosophie ist 

der d r Gegenwart 
und mit Logik ebensowenig zu tun hat v;ie die sogenaL.nte Logiiv Hegels 

oder etwa derjenigen von Karl Jaspers- -^o ist weähedn der otalinär 


völlig vernachlässigt worden, falls sie nicht in der I'athemetik einen 

Unterschluptf fand. Der Fortschritt besteht darin, dass sie jetzt 
berücksichtigt v;erden muss und damit euch andere Sparten v/ie die Semanti 
lengsam aber sicher in Hussland Kingang finden ULd finden miUsen vjenn 

eie nicht die :?ü.hlung mit den Grundlagenforschungen iu -ausländ verlieren 


Solotae Beweg'jLigen wie dor Jxlstentlal Ismus oder die Phänomenologie 

Westeuropas ,die ja hauptsächliche eine 3ti mungsphilosophie sind, 

binden in Russland keinen Sinlass.iie können euch keinen finden, v/eil 

sie das 3ohioksal des Individuums betreffen, nicht sein sozialens lohick 

saljdas in Huesland betont v;ird.3ie sind auch pessi^aistisch und beto nen 

stets die Tragik dser Existenz v/ährend in Hussland eher das Zukunftsbild 

Gesellschaft in der 
der menschlichen iixistenz und die Port schritte der ...enscheheit betont 

v^erden,die proletarischen i-ievolutionen,die -Befreiung der Kolonialvölkwer 
Uov>/. Pur die westlichen Völker be.-euten diese 3ntv;ickluigen eher ein 
nationales 1. glück als einen Portschritt «Daher ist auch für Cpti/.ismus 
v*/eniger nlass. Auch wenn es sich um die Präge der Atomspaltung ue. w. 
handelt , werden die positiven Polgen dieser iirf.ndungen betont nicht die 
negativen wie dies in '.Vesteuropa der ^'all i^t^Die grundsätzliche Stel- 
lungnahme ist daher eine andere urid dies fcndet in der Philväophie 
einen gewissen '.Viderhall« jjIq Brücke zur -«^hilcöophie des Vestens kann 
in BzUoSland lediglich die Philosophie der V/ic.sensohaft ,aie ii'rienntnici 
theorie,die Hutersuchungen über das jJenken,die K^/bernetik bilden, 
also wioöenschaf tlich gerichtete Theorien, nicht indisvidualistisohe 
3 timraungen, Emotionen usv/#Daran änö:ert nichts die Tatsache ,dass ein 


estlioher üixistentialist sich politioOh zufääligerv/eise als Zoramu- 

niiten deklariert. Von Hussland führt zur ?hil sophie von JeanPaul 
3artere oder Uartin eidegger ebensower ig eine Brücke wie zur Kunst 
von abstrakten I.Ialern ,die wie Pixcasse oich ebenfalls als Komniu ioten 

uarstellen.Ihre Kunst v;ird trotzdem als nicht reaiistisoLi verv/orfen. 
In den anderen kommunistischen «itaaten iot das ^erhültnis zu modernen 
Fu Istbewegungen ganz anders als in Hussland ,wo die Ueberlieferung der 
stalinistischen doktrinären Disziplin ungebrochen fortleben. "'enn 
■"o-^t jemals anders wird, dann so,dass b^istiuimte philc^^ophische künst 
1 rische I^ev/egungen gewissermassen in das ''Prokrustesbett des dialekti 

gehen 'aterialio us gezwängt Uüd als mit ihm vereinbar erklärt werden 
In PoüTn iot aies bereits heute der ^'all 


:i8n koennte allerdings sagen, dnss d e rea - • 

\. 4»;qor^^ip^-ln soll logischer, -mu die Zunst die Bealitl3t 1^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^^ 

seaaentervjeise besser zur 3rkenntnistheor^e^^^^|^^ -tjea^er 

erkannbar iot und iüm^ un.ere .i^.ne /auaae 

bekannt vdrd. .-, „lete -ngesiolit der marxistisch 

JhUo.ophie m Husslana erri'ot s.oh „,rau,.d.s. 

erregten-i utellektuelle xag^sxra. , ^^enarious 

, ^ „ti^rier iu Hassiand Anhänger voa unu . 
Deutschland .*eokanti&ner ,in .K^t-l^ru-gen vmrden 

. -oinpn verschiedenen Avbsohat .leru..gei 

,^„ .an„ dann f«.e„ .as a... ai ,^,„„.,,„, ,.,,. „. .^, 

V..U - =-^ -»^ -^ ^^"" TL ^r... aar ^.enntni.t.eoH 

«honrielt h^t.ilun '^ar aber die .rac« 

'» -"'" "°" r r ie^ a». .e. .'es» -e. aa. «Uio 
.ragon..r f.^oh ^^ ^^^^ ^,^,,,,,,e .eitergehen 

kritizsmus zun'Pfafientum .,. ,.^,,.ie der.miezur 

A flc.,- aonit die revolutionäre ^nergie ,ae 
würden u.d das^ acaiii ^..u^t vjtje.^'r ging in 

TT „-qmmff der Staatsordnung golEJimt w^e.- e 
^i„f 1 nn-ren ünvJandlung aar j«o. 
arevolutionoroii wi. est; , fl^.ii-cr-hpn 

. U4- ^«hi Die europLi.ohen und deutschen , 
nfser 'inriohätzung nicht fehl.Jie eur i 

'^•'- ■ r. uxxt- vpvoluoion^re .--r 

• 1 1 tpn h^ben aufgehört, reA,oj.uoxwi 
o.terreichiöohen Joziaii-ten n oe 




-, j , ,1-1 rii fl r avolcioionar e 
j,r dialektische uateriali.m. a.h. die 

U4 .nr «tK -13 hi.torisoher -...aterilaisiaus 
SntwioKlu.gsphilo.ophie war atit eis ...i^aa 

^ •? ^. 1 «> f -^ cip h A fiter lti-i.lüiiiu.b 

das x^igeutaiA Karl ^-arx.aiugtgen ^/mi 

a-of aaa au.^ornenso.llohe .-.■eltso.oheh,.. aa6.»endet, ein, Ausarbeitung 
Jrle.,rl=u .ngela u.a gerad. dieser r.ll de« lehre 1.. a. »elften veral 
tot u..d am meisten vergä oesteht Au:iii.Ii aur 
von Hegel.oheu Prinzipien aa. dem Geuiet aar .ogii. u.d ihre ^u.endang 
auf. .aturgeso.ehen .^s wird also hier eine lio.i.ti.i. rende ^'atarphi 
losophie.3ie will gewisse Verailgemeinerangen i philc.ophi 
scher Art auf alles Weltgeschehen anwenden und sie zu Gesetzen zu 
delcretleren.Nur einen Teil dieser Gedanken h-t ^n.^ls .n Lebzeiten 
in ei.^n. Anti-PUhring" hen.die übrigen .arden erst poathum 
in der So.letunicn :1er Hevoluticn .Is "Linlektil: der ITatur" 
veröff.ntlicht.i^KKiiriiucsi^ .agleich hat er behauptet ,dass diese 
latargesetze auch auf menschliches S— ..chaf tliches^geschichtliches 
a.schehen zutreffen. Diese "Gesetze" waren: das sogenannte Umschlägen 
der „uantität in u.lität .Dies v..ill heissen.d-s "'andlungen in der 
'Veit gev;öhnlich quantitativer Art seien.m . kan. z.3. 3toffe teilen 
una sie verLnüern dabei ihr Tesen nicht . .Tenn .man aber '■ saaer in 
.eine lelwt'ile auflö.t,dann i.t diese Veränderung bereits 
.aalitativ. üan erreicht i-^er einen gewissen i.notenpunkt der .'nt.iclc aem die Dinge einen sogenannten Sprung machen und eine 

wesentliche d.h. ^aaxitative .erunaerung eintritt, io i.t z.3. der 
spring vor.'. ?ier z'om ..eniohen, ein laalitativer ,aber auch der dp.ung 
dvom Kapiteliouiai zum iozitliomus in der menschlichen Gesellschaft. 
Das z.veite viesetz dieser Art ist idi: ^o^Rn-^nnte !Tf>gation Jer -tgatioi 
31'' besteht darin dass in Enti-zicklungsprozesa die Dinge in ihren 

NNis ma snv iidin hih iimoa sva mimz tmiirm snv CEn Nia 

Gegensatz ui-u c hj^iff- «mnvax OS HOI SSTO KäXIHCEie ffl TIOG SVM XHOIN SSI»M HDI 
uann aber d^a Alte dabei^tto'q^iiz^öpjStJsrtaö-pTuIiiJftiiS Stufe in der hoeheren 

ieuerho^.^n. Die.or dialektische 3 

-^ng eriu..,rt U,r an Hegels 

• • ( 

6 • •WNaAoxxzvsa»JOHPHTd[oiinxjMM& jcanM 


Teldenkens und 

These Antotheae und S-mtlieas .v.'omit auch der Sang des 
des .'/eltheschehens beschrieben werden ioUte. I«r dritte besetz :/ar 
die Surchdringu.g der Gegensätze d.h. die "'einung ,daS3 in .jedem Ding 
auoli dessen Gegensatz enthalten iat und dass in aer ..'ntv/icklung 
das eine Ouer andere hervortritt , eines ao.tirbt das andere auflebt. 
Dieses Peseta formulierte italin a la das "■^esetz von aer Einheit 
ur.d dem Kampf der ^iegensätze" uad er .ueintedtss im Gegensatz zur 
..etaphjsik die Dialektik auf^der Annahme ber.^htdasa allen ^-at-ar dingen 
Widersprüe,. eigen sind, dasssie .Ine negative ind pooltive ieite 
nesitzen,a'-:S3 diese Gegensätze im Eapf stehen.d^ss dieser rampf den des I^nt-.-iclclungsprozesse8 bildet .den Inhalt des Tn.chl.gena 
qualtit^^tiver " er^^nderungen in Qualitative, -ie man sieht. ist der 
iuuere Gehalt dieser Dialektik eigentlich der Gedanke von der 2ipola 
rität der Welt und von ihrer -andlung durch diese innere Gegensatz 
lichkeit,was i,ner vdeder auf These .Antithese u d 3, herauskomt 
Das ITichthogelsche dabei ist eigentlich nur die ümkehrung ins U.te 
rielle d.h. dasa nicht der -eist , sondern ier itoff.die Materie 
der -elt ist und dem üntwicklu gaprozes. ur.ter/Jorfen,nicht ein Geist 
Oder ■■; anderes Prinzip ,das de.aeu Gültigkeit die iov.let 
philc.ophie betont, ist die des i:au.alitaetsgesetzea.a..d au h darüber 
ist die :iei nu.g der modernen geteilt. Die .chv.oerigkeit für 

4. 1,4- ^ ,.4,-, A. <^ie neu entdeckte Phänomene 
die äowjetphiloöophie oeateht darin,dto- sie neu euou. 

auf dem Gebiete der atomaren Ph.sik, aie .aantanmechanik u.v;. im 

Lichte der angeblichen dialektischen ^aetze prüft ,um .ie ent^vede 

durch die neuen Srfinduugen "bestätigen " zu lassen oder sie als 

ralt den dialektischen Gesetzen unvereinbar zu ver.erg<=n. '^atsache 

ist aber,dass diese dialektischen besetze keine Gesetze in naturwisaen 

achaftlichen 3inne sind. sondern ziemlich belahrte philosophische 

Verallgemeinerungen, u .d dass sich moderne Erfindungen nicht 

in diesem dialektischen Rahmen ohne begrifflich. Ent.teliu..g u nterori 



n lassen. 3i haben z.3. die russischen Philosophen das sogenannte 


Prinzip der ronplempnt-ritrt der ropenh^gener johule von .ael3 -^ohr 
verworfen. Letztens haben sie sich wiederum damit aasgesöhnt and 
der Philosoph Oinelianowskj; behauptet das rriuzoip sei eine glänzende 
Heohtfertlgung der -.Vahrheiten der Dialektik, 3o handelt sich hier darum 
dass die ^^uantenteilchen aater gewissen \'/experinentellen Verhältniss n 
sich so ver'ialten wie V/ellen dann wieder wie Zorpu3kel,I)ies y 
zeigt nach Omeliano- sky wie wahr das dialektische prinzip der 5ingheit 
der viegensttze ist. liier handelt es sich i uru;.de um eine Interpre 
tation und ein U.terochied in Interpretationen i^t praktisch nicht 
so wichtig, -i'/enn man aber etwa i na er Pfianzenbiologie die Pra^e 
uer Erblichkeit der erworoeuen iaiigen^^oiiaften auf a^rund der dialekti 
sohen Prinzipien entscheiden will, dann v;ird die ^aohe bedenklich, 
weil dies eine JTrage ist, die nur experi enteil, nioht durch blosses 
nachdenken entschieden werden kannBekanntlich hat L:;ssenko die 
Erblichkeit bejaht ,und zwar auf Oru d der dialektischen LIateriali 


mus und dann behauptet ,da8s die Ex erirn^nte die ^Uohtigkeit seiner 

Ansolauungen bestr tigten.Dies wurde von russischen Biologen in letzter 

Zeit be'stritten.::an kenn ,it üche-'-^'^it annehmen, dass die Bedürfnisse 

die der ganzen .'elt 
der Praxis anerkannte naturwisserischaftliche Gesetze auch in liuo^land 

sdurchsetzen müssen, v/obei den rhilosophen die Aufgabe bleibt dies im 
Sinne ders dialektischen -ater ialis .lus zu reolitfertigen genauso wie 
et-;a die Ilirche zunlchst das kopernikinische Jonnens^^ tein ablehnte 
aber sich im 19. Jahrhundert rdt ihn aussöhnte utid das "'erk des Ilper 
ni^.us Ueber die ü c^rehenung der Jiii uelskoerpcr vorn Index der 
verbotenen Bucher entfernt vvurde« 

Wenn z.B. die ipw.jetpo^/chologie bioher „charf ablehnen KenUber 
der Freudschen Ps^^choaaal^'se stand, so ist der Grruad der, dass diese 
Psychologie das ^erhalten der i^enschen nicht von gesellschaftlichen 
VerhiLltnissen abhängig macht ,sonaern von der Jutersachung der 
jchichten der po^^ohic^ohen Persönlichkeit uiid diese sind nach sowjeti 

scher Anschauung weder tjypisch noch ■nrimär.'^ri iir für die ^srychil der 

..ansehen sind die gesellschaftlichen Verhältnisse ')1p. . 

j. uc-.x uniose . Jies mag zv/ar 

ps5;oliiooher Ersoheina igen riohtig oein-n'-raöntlloh nenn es sich 

um politisches /erhalten handelt, es riiuss aber nicht richtig sein 

wenn es sich am sexuelles /erhalten handelt. Ja könnten nunlioh andere 

Verhältnisse massgebend sein. Die i^ommunioten anderer i^i^-nder sind 

hier weniger dem "''^arxiomus" in diesem sowjetischen dinne verhaftet 

,30 hat der polnische marxistische -i^hilosoph gemeint die Psjychoanali'se 

die Phänemenoiogie und der ^^^arxismus seien die wichtigsten ^eiotea 

bev/egungen der Gregenwart.Er ist also in russischen Augen ein Reformer 

oder Hevisionist. 

Die russische Philosophie hnt eine gewisse Originalität auf 

dem Gebiet der Geschichte der ^hilcsor^hi'^ erreicht, und zvar gerade 

wegen ihrer marxistisch-leninistischen Parteilichkeit .die muss schon 

aeswegen einseitig beleuchtet werden, weil die iintv/ickl ngsphasen 

von dem Standpunkt beurteilt werden, ob dass der dialektische- *^iteria 

und Abschluss 
lismus der Gipfel der philosophischen B twicklung darstellt daher 

werden die Denker der ^'ergangenheit in ihrem Gewicht und "'^edeutuag 

darnach beurteilt ob sie ,ob utid wie sie sich diesem Ideal nähern. 

Daher erhalten gewisse Denker vie Upikur -über den übrigens ^-arx seine 

philosophische Dissertation verfasst hat-und Demokrit ,teil weise 

auch Heraklit,in der neuzeitlichen Philosophie der x/eterminist und 

Anhänger der Toleranz auf religiösem ^eoiete dpinoza ein höehere 

^ev/ cht, ebenso die Philosophen der -ciufkluruiig in i'rankreich wie Didero 

Gondiliac, Holbaoh ^^elvetius ,schliesslioj Hegel und i'euerbaoh in 

Deutschland , ferner die linken Hegelianer ein anderes ^ev;icht als 

die in den bisherigen Geschichten der Philosophie innehatten. Ferner 

erhalten in diesem Bild die sogenannten revolution ren Demokraten in 

Hussland d.h.di^ russischen Ilachfolger und Anhr:nger der Hegels ,d0r 

Lingshegelianer und Peuerbacha wie etv'a llikolai Tochern^sche\73ki? ,iierze 

Dobrolubow,I3elinski als gewissermassen als /orkoäufer des -Marxismus 

•Leninismus ein besonderes Bedeutung, die sich aus ihrer speizif ischen 

Kiolle in Russland ergibt. 

ho,,4.\. '^enn es sich um die Philosophie der "issenschaft handelt, die 
heute namenhfch in den LLndern englischer Sprache eine ^ieuptroUe 



spi9lt,so zpigt sioh das3 die Praxis der rnssisofian ^hilr soph-n h^i 

lO'-rraler wird.o.A. Kursanow ziti^^rt in.e.lneTn A.ufsat2".Die .Icgioohen . 
C^ru idsltze der .'^issensoliaft die ■i:i3i.Qhten, ^Uni^teins %i^^;ga"gder 
in ULseren 2agebn für die, Begriindung einer tiefen ^^rknapfang zivisohe 
Pn:; si.caiisohen' Uaa erkenntnistheoretischen -roblenien. k.jnpft. 
i-ur3a\7n-G^ •Erwähnt auoh ,dass der im J^hre 1951 verstor oehe ' ?r':3ide " ' 
^.v9r;rassisohen;^kadimie'der " asserisöhafteh 3 .I.'7a'.^/ilow gcösgb hat: 
^:hilo3opliie uda;-:^hvsilc. -Tiaren '^ den ^vi-dBetiiohafUiciaen (Pötigkeit toxi ■ 
Galileo,i:epler,5^r.seMi -e:soartQ^Qll]ü:Je^t,in,-(mö^^^ 

. ?lanc}:,,3ins.tein, and jedes ,rh:;s;i.:er3, der. einen breiteren Ausblick 
h^at., anzcrtrennlioh verknüpf t/Jawilcv;. fujlirt- . aach ai^a ,. wie uicj^tig 

■<•■ , v» "■.,'..•' . , ' ■ ■ : 

jl- * ' ' ■ . . ' . • . 

aie Ideen i^enins in oeinem Baoiie "*'^ateriaiic:uao Uud iim-oiriokritizrnus 

'■~':--'- .1 '"■ ■ , ' ;■.- ■'■ ' ••■'■ '"■ ■' .■■• V •. . ' ■. •' • , ■' ■ • ■■ '■■ '^ ■'■'■'■' • '■ . ■ 

für die aintwioklang der phj;sisohen V/i^^^enooiiaf t ^ege gewesen waren." 

und v/löhtig die Ideen aes dialektischen --aterilaimsmus für 

die "isaenschaft als >^anzes sind^Ala v^iohtige sowjetra^sische 

?iAäen;eOi'iö.ftIei' die' auf dfem^^eblis^tia' der-ph-^Vaikj^-ät 

..Biologie ,u d Ph7;s.iol'egie aa?b,e^l3F.n' ündi siöh^für' theoretisöh .philobophl 

sehe tragen, int eü, Imitiert i^^ur^sanow II/^^Eelä^'tsoh.D.T.Sohtscherbakov; 

N.iT.3em.ionow,L.A.A.r.tzi:no-^it5ch,y.A.?ook, A.P. loffe .L.D.L-nd^u.D.I . 
■* - ,">../..■ -h ■ ■ 

Blochinzew, A .lU^olr::0£:oro:-, o .; .oobol?^';, UD. Alexandre-', 

"- "' ' ;'■-■■■•'■ ■'. ■ ■•■''•■..■ /-*.•.■.. j , ■ 

3'i'A.Jnn6\^ska.ja, /.A^Ämbartzumian, V.F.Pessenko- , J- • ;j:uk.-rkin,..,I , 
D'Parin, ll,ir«31ssakian etc. Dies iot die 'Jreme der russischen wissen 
soiiaftliohen I^enker. 

Die russische .Ikndemie der i .senoohaften hat eine sechsb-ndi 
£-e Geschichte ^"er rhilosophie herausgegben, deren u^ruasp-ebenr die 
Professoren ;..A,D:ynnik,-.. .T .Jov;toChuk,B.:.I.ijICedrow,3,..l/"itin. 
T.I.OjoermEnn,ii.i'\Okulow oind, I.litin i^t auch lit^a aer Akademie 
der Viseen^ch^ften-^ie-dröVi/.vgohört zu aen abeaeut endsten Philv^ophen 

,uör 7i:ov^enoChaft in AuoSland....^^i\.Jcv;toChuk schrieb zur Präge aer 
iaeologiochen Gemeinsai:akeit apr jnivcv» .^o 4. 

19. aud^20.J,hrhundert einen j.Z f ^'^'''' "'"'^ ''^"^"^^^ ^«^ 

eiueu Aufoatz in dem .--r aus^rh.i- 

-r ausrunrte aaas sowohl 


die oestliohen alo aaoh aie -estl. /üll-'ir (Indien, arabioOhe , chinesisch 

Ancc.t2Q Giner raateri^r^Iistiochen -hilo^cphie vorhanden .aren, and 
dass die russ .PhilooOphie die i /eoten beliebte icheideunfc z.ische 
westl.and üotl. Philosophie ,v/OQei die Vestler als ^"ie^libten die ^estle 
als Idealisten iiaa ...^ .tiker auf treten, ablehnt. 

Dass die russ. Philosophie langsam die verg ngenen /erskaa 
nisse nachholt und jene Begriff sv/elt ,die sie bisher vernaohlä^^sig 
zu beatrbeiten anfungt ist z,3 durch die i... Juni 1964 erschiedenea 

Buch von L.O .Hesnikomv , eines "^rofessors der Leningrader Universität 

bewiesen: "Die gnoseologischen Frapren der Sfimlotik Dieses "'erl: ist 

viel sachlicher als die Schrift Llber diesen egenstand der ICaukasische 
Philosoph '^Pie Erkenntnistheorie der allg.3einantik'*^ere^7an 1959 
dieses Verk v;ar rficis polemisch während iiesniko\7 sachlich ist. 
Aber nicht nur die analgetische Philcsophis ist derart zur kenntnis 
genommen, sondern auch die s^^mbolische oder mathematische Logik des 
"bestens. 3o ist 1959 zum ersten ^'\al ein -^ehrbuch mathematischer Logik 
erschienen, dessen *erf asser f .3 •i^ov.'ikow ist Elemente der mathe atische 
Logik, "'ährend also die weltanschaulichen Aspekte der analytischen 
Philosophie Englands und Amerikas abgelehnt werden, weil sie als 
i:r3?ptoidealismus und Skeptizismus gelten, werden die objektiven Ergeb 
niose dieser Studien rezipiert , schon deswegen weil zum l'eil praktisch 
in der Kybernetik verwertet wurden, was sich nicht ignorieren liass. 
Die russische Philosophie wendet sich also langsam ucuieten zu, auf 
denen die Ideologie eine geringere Holle spielt. 

Zu den marxistischen Dogmen steht bekanntlich der Glaub 
an die Erkennbarkeit der ".^elt. Bs gibt in russischen rr^grxistischen 
'76lt kein verschleiertes Bild zu 3ais. 3o sagt -T.i:. Ilel-zil im Aufsatz 
»»Der ilensch im Haumzf-'italtor" ""•'^ehren in "er '^eit Tants und sogar 
^e^^^hlre^^^lll ^^'" ^ ^^'^ ' ^^^stehen von irgendwelchen 

2u pOotuLi^ren, fehlt ein 

er derartigen 


AnCere behaupten. drsa -die l)3?agilc aer -ag üer.aht caf der ' Zurlloügebii-. benheit 

sittliQ^^on- • '•' Fortschritt 

^er ?K±xtiRÄi5::hinter der v7io.-.en.oChaf tlioh tephniiohen .^Ätxli^iungi" 

» ' '. 

-■'ooh andere :.aF:en^dn,s3 niohts besonderes dioh ereigne t ^ hat ., die' Angst 


io Tragik, di3 Verein;iaraung,die Verl-^asenhei-t aes ^"enschen sind' das 

Kesaitat ..einer anaasweichllohen /erdarnmnis in dieser feit, .Vir .gehen 

-'■ V/arzel 

von der /oraaoc-etzang aus,dass die MratÄÄlie aüer 'Jebel jdie^rsa che 

des vvidersi-rachsvolien -^age des i.^ensohen ,der liiensohlichen •'ers-önliohkeit 
ist bedingt darch die ^^^egenwart des öCziaieii atruLktar ,begründef in dem 
Klassenantagoniomus,- In einem soziaiiötic.ohen otaat yjo dieseir Ant'äg nismas 
nicht exi-tiert sind die i:ieziehangen der ^erson zur ^eseiisöhaft ganz 
anders. f i^araas sieht man,da33 die Freiheit der Persönlichkeit hier 
identifiziert wird niit der Freiheit .der /,dass diese erstens 
aaf dem Verschwinden des Flas.3enant- gonlsmus' beruht .3& beruht also "auf 

■-•.'• • ■ 

der .•be^jTTssten i'isnip'ilntion u>d, i3?herrschung öer .geselläofiaftlic!ien'3nt 

wicklur.g und der -eherrschung der "Btargeaetze nie sie in den teohnisohen 
Fortschritt oich äussert. ^'in tsohe&hi^olie-r -arxiat hat z.J. gesagt ,dass 
die Aätronuatik eineu "3prarig" aus deu aeioh der x,otv.eiidiglceit in das 
reiche der Freiheit bede'ite.LIan sieht also ^ass diese Freiheit -einf 

aott'i^ freiheit ist und dnss die persönliche i^reiheit etwas abgelei 
craLLi g.xrtx.i ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ GeselLöchft 

tetes ict aie ist aach nicht eine Freiheit von der aesellschaft wie etwa 
das e:ci£tentia,i ali^^tische Ideal i Gegensatz zuia "Uan" sondern eine 
i'reilieit der (ieäellsohaf t. ..ccording to l.onotantiaovv Pedor ;. hovVeV-r 
"iÄK hat uio nbu. ^.:&eii^o^..2\.lxoii^ «-rü . i g ungeahnte .ichöpf '^rkrafte 
unü' freigesetzt, uereu ^euge , wie 7.1.-cniri i>agte,ss e^iuc 

uagegreuzte "*enge gilit. 

' - T^valiY/tschonko sagt.dass lauere Freilicit zwar relativ -urTab- 

. \-t '.ber nicht in Isolleru:.g bc-traolitet werden kenn, weil e« lurch 
hängig ioö,a^jcj. "i 

Tiacceb'jmg. bedingt ist und nicht frreicht werben kann, indem "nan' alles 
■■ iCTioriert...r'Pr üauptfchl^r der zahlreichen Freiheitabegrlfie 

Translated, unabridged, from Voprosi filosofii [Problems 
of Philosophy], 1964, No. 5, Moscow. Reprinted from 
Volume III, No. 2 (Fall 1964) of SOVIET STUDIES IN PHI- 
LOSOPHY, a translation Journal published quarter ly by 
International Arts and Sciences Press, 108 Grand St. , 
White Plains, New York 10601. Listings of tables of Con- 
tents are available on request. 

M. B. Mitin and M. E. OmePianovskü 


Voprosy filosofii, 1964, No. 5 

On the 27th of December, 1963, a Symposium 
organized by an American society, the Society 
for the Philosophical Study of Dialectical Ma- 
terialism, took place in Washington, D. C. The 
general theme of the Symposium was "Dialecti- 
cal MaterialismandPhilosophyof Science." The 
present writers, as representatives of Soviet 
philosophy, were invited to take part. 

At the outset let us say a few words about the 
philosophical society itself whose invitation we 
accepted. Recently for med, it constitutes one 
of the specialized groups in the context of the 
American Philosophical Association; the Pres- 
ident and Vice-Presidentare, respectively, Pro- 
fessor John Somerville and Professor Howard 
Parsons. The Society sets as its aim the crea- 
tion of opportunities for philosophers to hear 
and discuss technical papers concerning Prob- 
lems connected with dialectical materialism. It 
organizes discuss ions and symposia in which 
representatives of different (and opposing) 
points of View take part. In Cooperation with 
established organizations handling international 
cultural exchanges, the Society invites scholars 

M. B. Mitin is a Member of the USSR Acad- 
emy of Sciences; M. E. Omerianovskii is a 
Member of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences. 

from the countries of Eastern Europe, and is 
compiling a Yearbook for publication. 

The members of the Society are innoway re- 
quired to be adherents of dialectical material- 
ism. Among them, in fact, are not a few whom 
no one would think of including among defenders 
of Marxist philosophical materialism. But that 
is not the important point. What is significant 
is that a scholarly Organization is formed in the 
United States, for the purpose of studying Prob- 
lems relating to dialectical materialism, and 
arranges meetings and discuss ions with this 
end in view. 

The Symposium in which we pr es ented papers 
constituted a part of the general program of the 
(sixtieth) annual meeting (Eastern Division) of 
the American Philosophical Association, which 
has more than 2,000 members, drawn from the 
ranks of specialists and teachers in institutions 
of higher learning in the USA. These figures 
are the more significant when we bear in mind 
that other fields, such as sociology, mathemat- 
ics and the natural sciences, have their sepa- 
rate organizations. 

We were interested to see the exhibition of 
philosophical literature which was set up, as is 
customary at the annual meetings of the Associa- 
tion. In the United States a greatmanyworksby 

philosophers throughout the world are published. 
We saw on display numerous classics of philos- 
ophy, and translations of the writings of leading 
representatives of different trends in bourgeois 
philosophy. It seemedtous that the area of phi- 
losophy of science was sparsely represented in 
the exhibition as a whole, but possibly this might 
be explained by the fact that at the time of the 
International Congress ontheHistory and Philos- 
ophy of Science (Stanford, 1960) this field was 
Cover ed in considerable detail. 

However, in spite of the abundance and vari- 
ety of the philosophical works exhibited in the 
Statler-Hilton Hotel, where the meeting of the 
Association took place, we did not notice any 
Marxist philosophical productions, either on dis- 
play or in the publishers' advertisements. To a 
large extent the American reader lacks oppor- 
tunity to acquaint himself with the philosophical 
literature produced in our country and other 
countries of socialism, to consider and evalu- 
ate the researches of Marxist philosophers. 

Without entering into any analysis of the causes 
of this Situation, let us dir e et attention to sev- 
eral characteristic facts. In the USA, among 
the manyanti- Marxist books published, onefinds 
in particular the works of a "specialist" in crit- 
icizing Soviet philosophy, Professor I. Bochenski 
of Freiburg Univers ity, Switzerland. Inonepro- 
spectus we found a list of seven published works 
of this prolific writer devotedto "Soviet logic," 
"Soviet dialectical materialism," "dogmatic 
principles of Soviet philosophy," and so forth. 
Also on display was the book of T. Blakeley, 
Soviet Scholasticism , the author of which falsi- 
fies the basic principles of our philosophy and 
identifies dialectical materialismingeneralwith 
the one-sided exposition found in Stalin' s works. 

Can the American reader objectively judge 
Marxist philosophers and their works if he learns 
about them from incompetent author s or preju- 
diced historians, and does not have de facto 
opportunities of studying authentic productions 
of representatives of dialectical materialism? 

Some American philosophers try to Charge us 
with analogous faults. Thus, George Kline as- 
serts that in the Soviet Union we do not publish 
works of Plato, Augustine, Pascal, Hume, Nietz- 
sche, William James, John Dewey, and that this 
brings about a "limitation of the free exchange 

of ideas and cultural objects" ( The Journal of 
Philosophy, LX, 23, 1963, p. 741). This sort of 
assertion is not new, and is mainly the result of 
blas, though presented under cover of phrases 
about the "free exchange of ideas." In theschol- 
arly libraries of the Soviet Union there are 
Russian translations of the works of Plato, 
Augustine, Nietzsche, and of many other authors 
named by Kline, in quantities quite adequate to 
studying them. We would like to remind Mr. 
Kline that in the Soviet Union in recent years, 
extensive work has been under way in the pub- 
lication of the classics of philosophy, including 
a new six-volume edition of the works of Kant, 
and the translation of a number of early writings 
of Hegel, not previously in Russian. 

In our country not a f ew works of contemporary 
Western philosophers are published, including 
some who are very far from, and opposed to, 
Marxism. Thus, translations have been pub- 
lished of Bertrand RusselPs History of Western 
Philosophy, and of his Human Knowledge, Lud- 
wig Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophi - 
cus, A. Tarski's Introduction to the Logic and 
Methodology of the Deductive Sciences , R. Car- 
nap's Meaning and Necessity , P. Frank's Phi - 
losophy of Science , H. Reichenbach's Direction 
of Time , W. Heisenberg's Physics and Phi - 
losophy , and works of many other authors. Thus 
the clearly biased charges, referred to above, 
do not accord with the facts. 

Let US return to the question of philosophical 
literature. Coulditbesaid that Marxist philos- 
ophy has nointerest for American intellectuals ? 
Facts have long since invalidated any such no- 
tion. The Symposium itself, and the conversa- 
tions we had with leading representatives of the 
American Philosophical Association, onceagain 
convinced us that a deep interest in Marxist 
philosophy, including works of contemporary 
Soviet authors, exists among scholars in the USA. 

How was the sixtieth annual meeting of the 
Association organized? Somewhat mechanical- 
ly, a series of symposia (without plenary ses- 
sions) were strung together, e. g. , on the logic 
of Frege, on Heidegger, on problems of the appli- 
cation of philosophy, on materialism in general, 
and the Symposium in which we took part, on the 
theme "Dialectical Materialism and Philosophy 
of Science. " In the latter Symposium, papers 


were read by the foUowing prof essors: Paul 
Weiss, of Yale, on "The Scope of Philosophy 
and Science," M. B. Mitin, of the USSR Acad- 
emy of Sciences, on "Dialectical Materialism 
and Philosophy of Science," Quentin Lauer, S.J., 
of Fordham, on "Dialectical Materialism and 
the Concept of Science," M. E. Omel'ianovskii, 
of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences, on "The 
Concept of Dialectical Contradiction in Quantum 
Physics," and Robert Palter, of the University 
of Chicago, on "Dialectical Materialism and the 
Copernican Revolution." The formal papers of 
the Americans were around 15 minutes each, 
ours around 30. 

This Symposium had the largestatteiidanceof 
all those taking place at the time of the meeting. 
Assisting in the proceedings were the divisional 
President of the American Philosophical Asso- 
ciation, Marvin Farber, who opened the occa- 
sion with a welcome to the Soviet guests in the 
name of the Association, Sidney Hook, already 
known through his works against Communist 
ideology, Frederick Burkhardt, President of 
the American Council of Learned Societies, and 
other leading figures of the Philosophie Commu- 
nity. The welcome we received was a sincere 
one, not the kind characterized by merely cold 
or obligatory politeness in which there is no 
evidence of feeling. Oir papers were foUowed 
with interest; at the conclusion of the Symposi- 
um, many American philosophers approached 
US with questions, with requests for autographs, 
and entered into discussion in an atmosphere 
of frankness and cordiality. 

In the USA a large number of Philosophie Jour- 
nals are published; we discussed with various 
editors the possibility of widening scholarly con- 
tacts in this field. As a result of these discus- 
sions a Suggestion arose which probably would 
be widely welcomed: a Symposium to be ar- 
ranged by American scholars in June of this 
year on the theme of "Contemporary Material- 
ism and Humanism, " in which it was proposed 
that Soviet philosophers be invited to participate. 
It should in fact be useful for American scholars 
to have an opportunity to acquaint themselves 
directly with the Soviet approach to this Prob- 
lem. Some of the editors of Philosophie Journals 
put forth the idea of "arranging a kind of Philo- 
sophie Pugwash, " that is, a discussion meeting 

at which American and Soviet philosophers could 
discuss a broad ränge of Philosophie problems. 
We replied that this idea was one worthy of note, 
especially if it could ine lüde cons iderat ion of 
the broad issue of moral condemnation of war, 
and provide for examination of various aspects 
of peaceful coexistence. 

Insumminguptheresults of our trip, we feel 
that meetings of Soviet and American philoso- 
phers are useful. We are convinced that Amer- 
ican scholars want to be better acquainted with 
Soviet philosophers, and to have a deeper under - 
Standing of Marxist ideas. In this connect ion, 
what the outstanding American philosopher, Mar- 
vin Farber, wroterecently concerningour visit 
was characteristic: "Your trip was an important 
happening for international philosophy, and I 
hope it will not be the last significant step along 
the path of mutual contacts between Russian and 
American philosophers." 

Let US turn briefly to the other (general) Sym- 
posium on materialism. The f irst paper was giv- 
en by Professor J. J. C. Smart of the University 
of Adelaide. From the outset he took up the 
task of defending a materialist position, but 
Smart's Interpretation of materialism is dif- 
ferent from the Marxist view. As the former 
sees it, materialism is "the theory that there 
is nothing in the world over and above those 
entities which are postulated by physics" ( Jour - 
nal of Philosophy , LX, 22, 1963, p. 651). From 
this Position it is evident that Smart's concep- 
tion of materialist philosophy is a confused one. 
In dealing with the problem of Sensation, for 
example, he veered over to the position of vul- 
gär materialism, identifying the ideal and the 
material. The opposing Speaker, Professor 
Norman Malcolm of Cornell University, seized 
on the vulnerable aspects of Smart's view. He 
objected to the Identification of mental phenom- 
ena with the phenomena of the brain. If this 
Identification were a valid one, Malcolm main- 
tained, then the brain would have to include all 
the properties possessed by mental phenomena. 

The debate between Smart and Malcolm clear- 
ly illustrated the gross paradoxes which result 
from an attempt to treat materialism in general 
without taking account of the specific principles 
of dialectical materialism. In the light of these 
principles, matter and consciousness, when con- 

s idered in relation to the root problem of philos- 
ophy, can onlybelookedupon in terms of differ- 
ences, as opposed to each other. But this is not 
the case relative to all problems. It would be 
a mistake to look upon matter andmind, uponthe 
physical and the mental, as absolute opposites, 
having nothing in common. This was dealt with 
extensively and in depth by Lenin. 

However, the significant fact is not the char- 
acter of the polemics between Smart and Mal- 
colm, nor the limitations of their approaches in 
the course of the discussion. What is important 
is that in the USA a special Symposium is held 
on the Problem of materialism, in which an 
American philosopher openly defends a mate- 
rialist position. It is also noteworthy that in the 
presidential address of Professor Farber some 
notes approaching a materialist character could 
be heard (albeit of a naturalistic orientation), 
and that his viewpoint was opposed to that of 

In conclusion we should perhaps say a few 
words about the article of George Kline devoted 
to a review of the Soviet papers presented at the 
Xinth International Congress of Philosophy in 
Mexico, printed in The Journal of Philosophy , 
No. 23, 1963. (This issue was distributed to 
those attending the Association meeting. ) In 
this article, "bad enough,** to use the words of 
one American philosopher, the question of 
"peaceful coexistence" in the realm of ideology 
plays a leading role. Professor Kline, one of 
the editors of The Journal of Philosophy , of 
Columbia Univers ity, a veter an of anti-Commu- 
nism, has published a series of works devoted 
to the criticism of Communist morality, the 
historical-philosophical principles of Marxism, 
and the Philosophie foundations of the Program 
of our party. Kline' s article (a detailed analysis 
of which does not fit within the scope of the 
present report) is as a whole in the spirit of the 
worst traditions of anti-Communism, and repre- 
sents a typical manifestation of the ideology of 
"the cold war. "" Kline distorts the views on 
peace and peaceful coexistence expressed by 
the Soviet philosophers who took part in the 
Xlllth International Congress, and tries to cast 
doubt on the sincerity of the deeply humanistic 

principles of our philosophy. 

In their presentations at the International Con- 
gress in Mexico, the members of the Soviet 
delegation treated in scholarly fashion this 
centrally important ideological problem of our 
time. They showed the possibility of peaceful 
coexistence under conditions of economic com- 
petition between the Systems of socialism and 
capitalism, and also the inevitability of com- 
petitive struggle between the two opposing 
ideologies. They focused attention on the fact 
that the most important problem of our time is 
the termination of the *cold war" between gov- 
ernments. Precisely the ''cold war" and not the 
ideological struggle is what prevents the strength- 
ening of peace and the prospects of peaceful 
coexistence. It should be added that the views 
of the Soviet scholars found Support among 
many participants in the Congress, and from 
the side of Mexican public opinion. 

The presentations of Soviet phil6sophers at 
the various sessions, and the problems posed 
by our delegation, constantly became the focus 
of attention. Representatives of Marxist phi- 
losophy developed their positions in detail in 
relation to a whole series of problems concern- 
ing man and the contemporary world, exposed 
some of the most widespread falsifications of 
Marxism current in the West, and showed the 
deep humanism of the historical materialist 
under Standing of social life. 

In concluding these observations, we wish to 
express thanks to the President of the Society 
for the Philosophical Study of Dialectical Ma- 
terialism, Professor John Somerville. His 
energy and extensive labors in establishing 
scholarly contacts between American and Soviet 
philosophers, his tact and hospitality, facüitated 
to a large extent the success of the Philosophie 
meetings. It was at the initiative of this Society 
that the discussions between American and So- 
viet philosophers took place at the time of the 
Philosophie Congress in Mexico, which laid the 
foundation for communication between the phi- 
losophers of the USA and the USSR. The strength- 
ening of such contacts between the scholars of 
these countries will contribute to peace on our 
planet, and to the due fulf illment of scientific truth. 

Philosophy & Phenomenological Research 
Vol. XXV, No. 1, September 1964. 

The American-Soviet Philosophic Conference in Mexico 123 




Described by EXCELSIOR of Mexico City in a banner headline on 
the front page as Conclusiones de los Filösofos de Rusia y E. U., en 
Junta Secreta; Lucha con las Ideas, N urica con las Armas, an unpro- 
grammed Conference of American and Soviet phüosophers took place 
durmg the XIII International Congress of Philosophy. While in a sense 
private, since it was confined to members from the two countries, and 
while its form was agreed to only after the start of the Congress, it was 
m no sense secret. The initiative in organizing and Sponsoring the session, 
which lasted about two and a half hours, came from the Society for the 
PhUosophical Study of Dialectical Materialism, a speciahzed group open 
to aU members of the American Philosophical Association. Co-chairmen 
of the meeting were the present president of the Society, Professor John 
Somerville of Hunter College, and its first president (1962-63), Professor 
Howard Parsons of Coe College. 

In form the meeting was a sort of panel session, in which the Soviet 
philosophers had agreed to discuss any aspect of their Congress papers, 
mcluding philosophic aspects of the problem of peaceful coexistence, in 
relation to which quesüons might be raised. In fact, the questions ranged 
over the whole extent of Soviet philosophy, were seldom directed to any 
specific individual, and were answered mainly by the three leading 
members of the Soviet delegation who were seated at the dais: Professor 
P. N. Fedoseev, Vice-President of the U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences, 
Professor M. B. Mitin, member of the U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences and 
Editor-in-Chief of Problems of Philosophy, and Professor F. V. Kon- 
stantinov, Director of the Institute of Philosophy of the U.S.S.R. Aca- 
demy of Sciences. Other Soviet philosophers sat among the fifty American 
philosophers around the Conference Chamber. Each participant spoke in 
his own language. Everything said in English was translated into Russian 
by Professor V. Semenov, assisted by a coUeague. Everything presented in 
Russian was translated mto English by Professor Somerville. 

The present report cannot claim to be a verbatim record, or even a 
complete summary of all that was said. In some cases the present writers 


were not sure of the identity of the questioner; and some of the questions 
I and answers, or parts of them, may have eluded our notes and recoUec- 
• tion. ßut we hope that all the main lines of discussion are fairly accu- 
rately reflected in what foUows. 

The first question was put by Professor Parsons: In the view of Soviet 
philosophers, what are the chief problems of the contemporary world 
which were not foreseen and dealt with by Marx and Engels? 

In replying, Professor Fedoseev pointed out that this was of course an 

.' extremely broad question, touching matters of very great importance, but 

covering a very wide area. Some of the main divisions into which the 

subject matter might be broken down are: the evolution of productive 

i forces; the evolution of scientific knowledge; the concrete conditions of 

transition from capitalism to socialism and from sociaUsm to commu- 

) nism; the types of conflict, both internal and extemal, involved in such 

transitions. It should be kept in mii^d, in this connection that Marx and 

] Engels proceeded on the basis of an explicit theory of social evolution 

I and social progress, so that they had already envisaged certain broad 

Unes of development which in fact have come about, and which they 

may be said to have predicted. The distinction Fedoseev seemed to be 

drawing was one between basic structure and fundamental direction of 

movement on the one side, and concrete content and concrete problems 

on the other side, the unforeseen and undealt with (by Marx and Engels) 

being on the latter side. What was in point here he termed the dialectical 

contradictions of our epoch, suggesting that these could be traced at dif- 

ferent levels - the level of large-scale events, such as the transition from 

socialism to communism, the level of the "dialectics and the logic" of 

scientific knowledge, including the whole area of epistemology, methods 

of research, and so on. Dwelling especially on this aspect of the matter, 

the Speaker emphasized the significance of new and unforeseen develop- 

ments in science, such as cybernetics, nuclear physics, recent studies of 

the higher nervous system, advances in our knowledge of the cosmos, 

and in special fields hke crystallography, and the progress made in our 

understanding of the processes of development from the organic to the 


Fedoseev developed the thought that the concrete problems of the 
present day, not dealt with by Marx and Engels, to which contemporary 
philosophers must address themselves, included also the whole ränge of 
the social sciences, a field of work historically relatively new, as well as 
traditional disciplines such as the history of philosophy, the philosophy 
of art, and ethics. The implication appeared to be that there are new pos- 
sibilities of content in these traditional disciplines which no one could 
have foreseen a Century ago. In this connection Fedoseev concluded with 
the remark that today special importance attaches to problems centering 



Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 

on the person, on the development and interrelationships of individuals 
as individuals. 

Professor Mitin added a comment in relation to this question, pointing 
out that the character of Marxist philosophy must be taken into account. 
It does not aim at Solutions which will stand as frozen positions. "It is 
not to be approached as a dogma, but as a guide to action." In other 
words, one must not presuppose that its claim is in some sense to foresee 
everything and ans wer all questions in advance. It does not consider that 
the emergence of new conditions and problems constitutes a defeat for 
itself . On the contrary, it points out that there will continue to be new 
Problems and new conditions; its basic methodology takes precisely that 
into account. Mitin applied this thought to the present epoch by way of 
emphasizing that the problem of paramount importance today is inter- 
national peace. While in its general features this problem was foreseen 
by Marx and Engels, not even Engels, who was something of a specialist 
in the technology of warfare, could have foreseen the character of present 
day weapons, in all their unimaginable destructiveness. Several times the 
Speaker retumed to the point that Marxism from its beginnings had put 
forth as an over-all social slogan, "peace and labor." 

Looking at the original question from its positive side, Mitin made the 
point that "foreseeing" raised the issue of scientific prediction, in this case 
as applied to society and the evolution of society. In that sense, he said the 
basic predictions made by Marx in relation to the course which human 
history would take could truly be said to represent "the most important" 
ever made in that field. New details of course have entered, and will 
continue to enter, into these phenomena; new contradictions emerge; new 
complexities develop. The "dialectics of the transition from socialism to 
communism" was indicated as affording abundant Illustration of this 

Professor Brand Blanshard, Emeritus of Yale University, asked: What 
is the explanation of the surprising degree of uniformity which appar- 
ently exists among Soviet philosophers? In the American tradition, 
philosophers have many different points of view. They by no means 
agree on their positions or in their allegiances. This, however, does not 
seem to be the case among Soviet philosophers. The formulation of the 
question carried the impücation that, whereas American thought is 
pluralistic, Soviet thought is monolithic. Illustrating with generally appre- 
ciated humor the point of this question, Professor Blanshard remarked 
that he would like to read sometime that a Soviet philosopher had pro- 
mulgated a new proof for the existence of God. 

In replying, Professor Fedoseev posed a counterquestion: Why is it 
necessarily better that there should be a number of different viewpoints 
in regard to a given problem? What is at issue in the context of phUo- 


The American-Soviet Philosophic Conference in Mexico 125 

sophic discussion is the truth about something, which truth, if it is sought 
in a rational sense, is by definition one and not many. The implication 
was that a major reason there was more agreement among Soviet than 
among other philososphers was that the viewpoint of the former was 
more scientific. Just as there is one mathematics and one physics which 
we seek, so there is one philosophy. Having once discussed our differ- 
ences, then we Soviet scholars tend to form a group to defend a common 
general position, though not a permanentiy frozen one, because we are 
convinced that it is the best. There is, moreover, a kind of specious 
pluralism about American bourgeois thought. The Suggestion was that it 
only seems like a wild assortment of tropical flowers, but should fool 
no one who recognizes the daisy in each position. The differences which 
exist are largely differences within Idealist and anticommunist groups. In 
a sense, it is a scene of many tendencies, but one world view. It should 
also be pointed out that the, so-called divergences of Western views 
reflect ideahstic and unscientific pretensions. Questions of dialectics 
and Interpretation are hotly disputed in the Soviet Union, but in the end 
some kind of scientific agreement may be reached because the conclu- 
sions are based upon objectively verifiable reaUty. One need not list the 
number of bourgeois philosophies which are not only not scientific, but 
to all intents and purposes antiscientific. In this sense Soviet philosophy 
cannot take seriously the supposed many-viewed approaches of bourgeois 

Professor Konstantinov also commented on this question, emphasizing 
that there is much more freedom of intellectual discussion in the Soviet 
Union than is usually realized. American philosophers, it was pointed 
out, could convince themselves on this score by Coming to the Soviet 
Union, observing these discussions and taking part in them, as a number 
of American philosophers had already done. Professor Fedoseev remarked 
parenthetically that they would not encounter the kind of difficulty about 
entrance visas which had on several occasions prevented Soviet philoso- 
phers from accepting invitations to take part in philosophical discussions 
in the United States. A recent series of publications in the U.S.S.R. 
centering on philosophical questions concemed with research in the field 
of higher nervous activity was cited as an example of sharp and sustained 
debate in the field of philosophy of science. 

A question was raised by Professor Richard Hocking, requesting 
clarification of the concept of dialectics in point of its ränge of applica- 
bility. If contradiction, as a concept going even further than Opposition 
or conflict, be taken as the essence of dialectics, must not this concept, 
strictly speaking, be limited to the level of consciousness? Is not the 
attempt to apply it to inorganic phenomena open to the Charge of 


Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 

The American-Soviet Philosophic Conference in Mexico 127 

imputing to these phenomena conditions which could only be found at 
more complex levels? 

The reply to this question, given by Fedoseev and Mitin, was that 
the principles of dialectics may be seen in Operation at all levels of 
phenomena, although each level is also characterized by laws unique to 
that level. The principles or laws of dialectics represent the basic pattems 
of relationship found common to all levels. They are thus the most 
general laws. Certain observed pattems of change, development, and 
evolution are common to the behavior of phenomena as widely separated 
as the most distant Clusters of the largest stars and the smallest atomic 
particles within chemical Clements. These pattems are found both in 
what happens inside crystals and inside a higher nervous System. Recent 
films have shown in a remarkable way what goes on inside crystals 
previously thought to be impenetrable. The dialectical aspect in seen in 
those conflicting relations of form and content which can only be 
adequately expressed by terms like contradiction. Such a term is neces- 
sary in view of the actual outcomes of the processes or dynamics which 
these relationships represent. 

Several interrelated questions were raised concerning the Soviet Inter- 
pretation of aspects of the transition to communism, the role of classes, 
class stmggles, and the State. The ensuing discussion was participated in 
by Professors Fedoseev, Mitin, and Konstantinov, with occasional inter- 
jections from Professors Melvil, Kopnin, and other Soviet philosophers. 

The first point which was emphasized in answering these questions 
was that such social transitions as those from capitaHsm to socialism 
and socialism to communism become necessary because a System other 
than the prevailing one is better adapted to manage the problems which 
have arisen. The old joke to the effect that the post office was the first 
socialist Institution has a serious point. The System of private ownership 
and individual control simply cannot manage to solve the sort of prob- 
lems which we face today, in terms of the ever growing technological 
complexities of production. An efficient and satisfactory Solution of 
these Problems is unthinkable except on a basis of social planning and 
widespread social Organization of production. 

As to the kind of Opposition, conflict and contradiction at the con- 
scious and the social level which would be present even under socialism 
and communism, it was pointed out that this would not take the form 
of struggles between classes, but would be basically struggles of man 
against inimical or limiting forces of nature and of his environment. It 
is true, as Marx long ago maintained, that class struggles were the chief 
dynamic of human history in all those epochs characterized by the 
existence of antagonistic classes - groups having such differing relation- 
ships to the means of production as to bring them into constant conflict 

with one another - but, as Marx of course also maintained, the price 
of class struggle as a social dynamic is too high. Antagonistic classes 
in the economic sense must be eliminated as soon as possible, and are 
eüminated under socialism and communism. 

The role of the State, it was emphasized, must always be seen in 
relation to classes and class antagonisms. Marxism has always located 
the essence of the State not in social Organization or administration as 
such - that is quite possible without a State - but in the permanently 
organized apparatus of physical enforcement based on law. The necessity 
for that came about with the rise of deep-seated economic conflicts 
within a society. Thus one could say that a world without antagonistic 
classes could do without the State; the State would "wither away." But 
the State could not be expected to wither away in a Single society from 
which antagonistic classes had bcen eliminated if that society existed 
within a world where antagonistic classes were elsewhere to be found. 
It was again stressed that it would be incorrect to conclude that a world 
without the State would be a world without planning and Organization. 
On the contrary, future stages of society would probably be such as to 
call for very far-reaching planning and organizing. It should also be 
emphasized that the disappearance of antagonistic classes does not in- 
volve any lessening of individual differences among persons, any decrease 
of individuality at the psychological or cultural level. It involves in fact 
an increase in the forms of growth, and thus in the needs and demands, 
of the human person. What foUows is an enrichment of individuality, 
and the rise of new challenges. 

An inquiry was made as to what the Soviet answer would be to 
criticisms advanced by Plekhanov and Rosa Luxcmbourg in the initial 
period of the Bolshevik regime charging that that regime had betrayed 
basic principles of Marxism. However, as the question did not specify 
the content of the criticism nor the evidence on which the Charge was 
founded, Professor Fedoseev replied that it was too vague to be answered 
concretely. Also, the context was necessarily restricted, as Plekhanov had 
died as early as 1918, and Luxembourg in 1919. 

A question concerning the doctrine of dialectics was posed to this 
effect: If the dialectical movement is discemible everywhere, as presum- 
ably it is for Soviet philosophers, then in what form does it appear in 
chess games, in paintings, or in musical scores? How does dialectics 
manifest itself in things not immediately connected with economics and 
politics? For instance, do you find dialectics in some relation between 
the white keys and the black keys on a piano? This question was posed 
at considerable length, with a number of hypothetical examples of the 
reductio ad absurdum variety, intended to show that various ways of 
constming dialectics would be ridiculous. Professor Fedoseev preferred 


Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 

not to take this question seriously. The answer could be worked out, 
though probably not to the satisfaction of the questioner. Fedoseev's 
attitude seemed to be that since the problem was posed only in a face- 
tious or "needling" spirit a serious Solution need not be suggested. 

At this point Academician Fedoseev took the floor to make a State- 
ment relative to the meeting. He said he was gr^atly surprised at the 
content and nature of questions now taking up valuable time. Many of 
US have traveled thousands of miles to come together in these philo- 
sophical meetings. This would hardly be worth the effort unless we are 
going to keep to questions more important than the dialectics of chess. 
In fact, one cannot help wondering, as one thinks of the course of our 
discussion so far, what has happened to so important a problem as 
peaceful coexistence? Put more concretely, what is the explanation of 
the fact that among a group of American philosophers so little interest 
and attention seem to be given to the philosophic aspects of such a 
tremendously grave question as that of peaceful coexistence? 

Professor Parsons, as Chairman, inquired if any present had ques- 
tions which they would wish to raise conceming problems of peaceful 
coexistence. He recognized Professor George Kline of Bryn Mawr, who 
presented an inquiry along the following hnes: If there can be peaceful 
coexistence in relation to the problem of international warfare in the 
military sense, why cannot there be peaceful coexistence in the realm 
of ideology? 

In reply Professor Fedoseev pomted out that what is usually meant 
by peaceful coexistence in the realm of ideology is cessation of the con- 
flict of ideologies; but this confhct is a contest of ideas, and there is 
nothing wrong with that. There is no reason to stop a contest of ideas, 
since from such a contest an improvement of ideas may result. The con- 
flict one seeks to prevent is the contest of force, since such a conflict 
may destroy the world. It is very important to remember that the ideo- 
logical conflict, the contest of ideas, should not be identified with the 
cold war, as if they were of necessity one and the same thing. What one 
objects to in the cold war is not any competition of ideas, but such 
phenomena as refusal of normal diplomatic relations, naval blockade, 
illegal interference in the internal affairs of other countries. Such hap- 
penings are very far from being a contest of ideas. If persisted in, they 
become a preliminary to hot war. 

What must be recognized as basic in the Situation, continued Professor 
Fedoseev, is the fact that there are in the world today powerful states 
which, like ours and yours, represent different ideological viewpoints. 
Now it is of course absurd to entertain the notion, for example, of 
making any kind of treaty that you must think as we do, or that we must 
think as you do. That is nonsense, and is impossible in any case. But we 

The American-Soviet Philosophic Conference in Mexico 129 

can agree not to use weapons, or the threat of weapons, to settle the 
ideological differences between us. That is the root meaning of peaceful 
coexistence. We feel that all philosophers should oppose the cold war; 
but that does not mean that they should oppose a contest or competition 
of ideas. 

Professor Dale Riepe of the State University of New York at Buffalo, 
presenting the next question, said that when he traveled in Asia the 
Asian philosophers claimed that American philosophy was too materi- 
alistic; and now the Soviet philosophers claimed that it was too idealistic. 
What is the truth of this matter? Is there any hope, from the Soviet point 
of view, for American philosophy? Professor Fedoseev replied that there 
certainly were indications of positive Clements in American philosophy. 
He did not enter into any specific critique, but pointed out that a number 
of works of American philosophers had been translated into Russian, 
and were favorably evaluated by Soviet critics. In Soviet philosophical 
literature one could find a great deal of reference to American philos- 
ophy of the past and present, reference by no means always negative in 
its import. 

A question was specifically directed to Professor T. I. Oizerman of 
Moscow University, relating to the paper, "Man and His Alienation," 
which he had presented at the Congress. The point raised was whether 
or not Professor Oizerman considered alienation to be essentially an 
economic phenomenon. Could it be dealt with adequately if so con- 
sidered? Professor Oizerman stated in reply that he quite agreed that 
alienation was a many-sided phenomenon, which must be treated at 
many levels beside the economic - the political, the ideological, the 
psychological level, and so on - just as the overcoming of alienation was 
a many-sided process, which must also work itself out at the different 
levels. The specific thesis which he had tried to demonstrate in his 
paper, Oizerman pointed out, was that ahenation had deep economic 
roots, and that these must be properly dealt with if the problem is to 
be solved. In other words, alienation has an objective as well as a sub- 
jective side. It must also be bome in mind that confhct is not necessarily 
alienation. There are many forms of conflict and difference which lie 
outside the sphere of alienation. 

Professor Paul Weiss of Yale University, having been recognized for 
a question, said he would hke to use his time to express a sense of grati- 
tude and appreciation to the guests and participants in the Conference, 
and to those who had organized it. He voiced the strong feeling that this 
kind of philosophic dialogue was one of the most important in which 
contemporary scholars could engage. His comment was met with marked 
approbation by the gathering. 


Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 

In the estimation of the present writers the confrontation of these two 
groups of philosophers had the following significance: 

1) It was the first large-scale meeting of American and Russian phi- 
losophers since the founding of the U.S.S.R. From an intellectual or 
cultural point of view, this was long overdue. 

2) The mere fact that the Conference gave an opportunity to American 
and Soviet philosophers to look at and listen to one another in the flesh, 
and in the give and take of philosophic discussion, was significant in a 
psychological and moral sense, in addition to the philosophic value 
represented by the communication of ideas. 

3) The experience of organizing this Conference Warrants the belief 
that Conferences between American and Soviet scholars, in the interests 
of greater mutual understanding, could be brought to pass in almost any 
intellectual area, if approached with a presumption of mutual good faith 
and on a basis of equal rights. i 

Hunter College, City University of New York. 

4 > 


State University of New^ York at Buffalo. 

1 The Society for the Philosophical Study of Dialectical Materiallsm feels it 
would be of value to continue efforts for cultural exchange in the field of philos- 
ophy. Members of the American Philosophical Association who share this view 
will facilitate the possibility of future Conferences by informing the Society, or one 
of the present writers, of their interest. 

^wor urlloh^The j>oub le Imagt ^ooncept of the x^oet In dl^ivi> 
rhe Johns Hopkins Press »Baltimore Uar^landaec pageb.Pi'loe ^ 5- 


The author^a m.tivc^ of Hu. 3la ,on '••xp<>rt on Rassian literature r.nd o pro- 
fesaor at inlo ITuivt'raity trios to oxf^^plia*:7 here »^the poet»a iiv ^^a cf 
hia ov/u ocliing f?»lül] b.y bhe CD.rAPr« of flve Rtisaian Rnd cne oliali 
poet.^'^hether hhCf incli-rlor/ /t^*:ifles the RrT>8ll*it1on"31öYio" -iucU^aü 


of Ru-tian- is i.jcötior-ajlr , T'i- title "double Image" is takou ^e Jiic 
auuaor a'v'.re Troui tiic bc:b of t;vo Y^onn^ae psychoanaij/tio vait/e^'ö on 
art ;irn3t. Zria ;aid Ottc liurs , f-ntltled "Me Ley-.ncLe von KLaiut,i..r ' .^/fey««/X- 

... .;rri t p:---p "nd Abraham Kaplan piÜLiäUfc.. ia ^^^^'^> 

Cmen 19Ü4;. A booi 

USA (xh 


iio -M. ;..../ 1 -1 -^^1 1? j^on 8 inac .^^rjb )alop do^ll; ^^i^^ii '♦;,:ao 

Image üi tiie artii)t'\ Altho'aß:h th^ dlscuasion of the ''metapOv. vloa ■ .f 
;s.l£X' nder x'Uohxiin and 

^*oi^:^^fStit-l^^ ^'lieboska Komedja" (ündivin^Giacdrr ^tks 

toiweK up aiLic.-:t a^t;!iird of th^ whole oext^itja oentre of gravxt^' iiea 
in Uie c: itloal trO'-tinientd|:f fo^xr dyiaboliat rnd po.:t*;i.vmbGii. L iiu^iiiun 


poo-Uö \;iK iivod Lp, faef» tae ria© of Bolahevisni in tholc ov.u iand ti^uöi-i? 
Valerii Briuasiur, aexcndor Bloli , Vladimir Uayaicovßlcii aua iioris 
Paateinaii.BuuIi othors arc montloned: Oeaip Mendel shtom, Oorgt^' ..u;atuln 
Anaroy fi^^^dbc Bi^el^'i .Llrii^inci Irv^ffta^ev?.. ötc^ 

Tho iuport..rioe of th(> bock ll-^s hnyonä ltsfioct^n«ibl'* f>«örv -rii* /.'i- 


the poot tliinjca of his o\;n ornft,nf "^^ortr^ :,o ^. c^^r^'^r aa 



h Ol n 

u^nn Ol. ^ 

rt of -T^^lr^^!^t9 ift TcrT7 er^ciTt^ i^e oi ... /..ii>. 

toola cf .o.rrn ■ &i ra orltiolau on ^dsinn lltcr?: tiire. A 


a 3t'iu^ ou "Ha.idan PciMc}libT" f7:nbl5.-^hed imiwjjfcaij In iioiiaUwi »^ijour 

Eriich i;: a poro-^ptirs eitle of the r»poch in vaioh bhü^-ö ^Oiu: u'r..^cian 

poefcb iivüü ond vor-'ied.All of thj»n^.: Briassov,3:iok , Hayakovoi.ii -nd 

Pactexr^ai: •^o'^le^-nl th-^ir/ •t':itnre ea T^oeta axid vTitora airoad^; _.A.: th 

Wu.öia i/Hevc-l'-^^* '.-»n , ?'^/' of them Booepted it '-•it^ rno.:« oi ^-ü ^:-a&.:i 


Oüi,; 10 uio -w - \ ^'/'upp th^ «xc^^Tjtion of jriusaov- diseiiviübuted 
anhap-y»Jonü ox uhein pclitioalLj eng^ied o<?fore the nt'voxu'^lou/' jo 


vir'- rr Andrev »y*T* Bi'elyi tlie revcl- 
ution .es a v-Hic-a ^. , .... .. clcrr break 

jttdisiosf , ,;^,„tion he v<üaid appeal 'oo -"^1^^ to ro;)Ort 
entUasiasiu .m:iitt2ai/AOucrotlon,he wooi. 

, .nto-r of .'^xoo3 n. .for tU.t of ete«i wacu pooma boe:... s.orda. 
, ,. , ,1 n— -»ae t-^« Revolution and ii*t.JUtd ....^-. 

nemed profoBoor at ..0.00.7 ^.^fticea 

^ «, tn «rr ret'.ru to Her lio-uoland, 3loIc ixea a 
fugoe l:.üi' v'ho rofaaea to arr ret ru ,,,«,.,, ...n^-d 

suiode, 'o-AC 01. the ..oir 

-I ' e-iin^ca to oope witd the KUöSxeu i 

T ,„ ^hr.n^e of th9 social and aorax J-i at-J c. 

iii^. a ^ 


the KX onr o« Brluaaov. 

>.C iiie aoortO' 


But vjlij tli.u uotioi." J-i'-.- ^ ^^ 
oultursl 31-atuö O-'- -^^ "-^^"^ » ^^^^^ H^-n^^-Hrt- 

Llax Hioftei 

7ip "^' 

Afa-^ ':^e^r 



pssaiyh äh 


Xc "fsi^rLoi 

k >. 



V • 

3s ist sehr "bemerkenswert ,da3s die beiden, einflussreiehsten f ö;yoiiolc,g'^n 
der Gegenwart- Ü^read im V/eaten (Amerika und ii'ngland) ,Pavlov/ im Osten 
(Hussland) keiae Psj/cliologen von Paoh waren , sondern -^^atarwissenschaft 
1er , Freud war ein Arzt and -avlov ein Physiologe, Auf dem Höhep'ibkt 
ihrer gesitigen I3ntwiGklung behandeln beiae ein sehr ähnliches 
z.Bl^eil das nämliche ^ebiet , nämlich Ps:;chiatrie ,aber von einem 
v.llig entgegengesetzten Standpunkt alsoo sie von zwei völlig abgelege 
nen Jternen herkämen. Beide sind ab-r trotzdem anh. nger einer 
ileturwissenschaft im oinrie der positivistischen des 19.JFhrhu dert 
sie sind -^-aterinlistenjOb'wohl i'reud rein introspektiv von Trieben, 
Hemmungen ^Kksx spricht ,v Pavlov von Beflexen und deren lintwijkluiig 
"*ur das ".7ort '^Hemmung'* kommt in beiden 7or.,aber bei Pavlo^^^hat es 
eone ohemi3ch-ph:ysikalisohe ,bei rreud ein rein ps^/chisohe ^edeutung 
Preud begann als eurologe und beschäftigte sich zuerst mit Hvsterie 
und .i3?pnose, um dHnn zu den Neurosen zu sohriten.Bei Pavlov waren 
die psj/o^iischen iitörungen, Hysterie und x^^^eurosen der ii'ndpiiunkt der 
Untersuchungen. -Bei ^reud war der Einflusa der französischen (belehrten 
wie ^aharvoot und -^ernheim weit stärker als bei Pavolov der nur 
hauptsächlich von seinen russisc en Vorgängern und den deutschen 
beeinfluss war. J3r arbeitete 1Ö84-86 im Ausland ,und z ar im Laborato 
rium von Karl Ludwig, der die Blutzirkulation und im denjenigen von 
Rudolf Heidenhain, der die Ph;^;siologie der ^erdauung studierte. 
Pawlow erhielt bereits 19o4 den nobelpreis für seine Arbeiten über 
die Physiologie der '/erdauung .Selb eigentliches Hauptwerk waren 
die Vorlesungen über die Arbeit der hauptsächlichen 'iersauungsdrüse'' . 
Diese Drüsen sind die gastrischen Drüsen und das Pankreas (Bauchspei- 
cheldrüse). Seine psyc'iologisohea Werk u entv^/ickelte sich ajs 
der Untersuchung der Arveit der 3peich(Bldrüsen. Diese Vorlesungen 
v/urden am Institut fpr Experimentelle ^edizin in Petersburg gehalten 
ksi und an der Ililitärischen Medizinischen Akademie wiederholt (in 
abgekürzter Form) und 1897 veröffentlicht. Dies sicherte Pawlow 
den Weltruhm und sen Nobelpreis 1904. iir war 1904 bereits 55 Jahre alt. 
Die ersten Arbeiten Pawlows \-urden in Pflügers Archiv für die gesar:.te 
Ph^/si^ologie (noph 1877 eine Arbeit über den ^ j^öhnsisrnua der Bl^ltgefässe 

(J ^ Pawlo^w (Ivan PetrowiFiorijv/urde 1849 inTgasan als cJohn eines 
orthodoxen Priesters geboren-^iEr gibt selbst an dass er von Pisarew 
geistig beeinflusst v/urde ferner durch sden Altemeister desr russischen 
Ph:;siolcgie I.U.SeJschenow ,der 1903 sein letztes V/erk"Die i^le emente 
des -Denkens" zwei .ahre vor seinem ^ode herausgab. Setsohwenov/s 
Broschüre "Die Gehirnreflexe" übte auf Pavlov noch während seines 
VBesuches des oeminars in Hjasan einen Binfluss aus und dieses "^erk 
gab die Anregung zur Untersuchung der -^^e'lexe und den Anstoss / 
zur Theorie der bedingten Beflexe ,die Hauptlebensarbeit Pawlows«'— '*^ 
Diese Broschüre v/urde 1863 veröf rentlioht als Pawlov/ 14 Jahre alt war. 
Um diese ^eit machte , erzählt Petrow Ivan Uiohailowitsch Setschwenow 
sine Bntdecku.ig ,die die deutschen und französisolien -Physiologen tief 
beeinflu^gte die "zentrale Hemmung (Inhibition) des ^ehrins. 
Üajjjl^w- erv/ähnt als Vorgänger in der Ausdehnung der Physiologie 
"auf die Nerventätigkeit als besonders wichtig die Augabe des 
Subjekt ivfln -Standpunkts ind die Annahme der objektiven Unter suchungs 
matiTüden und der Objektiven '^'erminologie (J.Loebv. Theorie vom Tropis 
"mus in der Tierwelt und die objektive l'erminologie angeregt bei durch 
Beer «öethe und ^exküll. Dit se objektiven deutschen Psychologen, 
ferner Jacques Loeb und schliesslich die Jugendeindrüoke des Werkes 
von oetschenow waren bestimmen für die spätere psychologische "eistunge 

r^aws. D.I. Pisarew den Pawlow als Anreger der 'Studiums der Jätur 
""Jv-s^nsohaften war ein.Polpularisator der Naturwissenschaft und aer 
'mp'^eJlalis tischen Weltanschauung und dre revolntion^ren "nfiTnokrotiö 

^^'misland im Sinne vou A, I.Herzen, Belinski.Dobroliubow und Tscherny 


/ -t 



<€^ 4 


PawlQvj beau hte in seiner Jugend kein Gy: nasirnn sondern ein Seminar 
für eistliohe in RJasan und er rühmt es insoforn dass dort 
ein iSiensoh '»seine eigenen Keidintellektuellen iJeigun^en folgen konnte 
was in den berüchtigten Tolstoy Gj^mnasien nicht der -^all vmr bedauer 

lloherweise faund auch nicht der -^all ist)l870 betrat Pawlo\7 die 
Petersburger üniversitör -^r studiertedort Ph3;sik und ^^^athematik 
und die se Fakultät hatte ihre Blütezeit Br selbst v^ählte die 
ph3?siologie der Tiere als Haupt-und Chemie als **ebengegenstand 
Alle v;aren vom Ph^^siologen Professor C^^on beeindruckt Dann trat er in 
die Medizinisch Chirurgische Akademie ein und v/urde AsaibStent 
des •^rof.G37cn «der aber von der Akademie verjagt wurde .Er vvurde dann 
Assistent von ^rof .K^H .Ust/6imovich den Vortragenden der Ph^siolo 
gie am Veterinär InstitutL878 Yinrttff^yyirryflrtffyiiKytnals Ustiiovich 
dieses Instut verliess v/urde er Mitarbeiter im ^aboratorium des Prof. 
3«P.3otkin wo -r viele Jahre arbeitete nachdem er einen ^urs nahm 
im Institut fnr die Vervollkomianung der Aerzte.Dann ging er für zwei 
Jahre nach -Deutschland uad blieb dort so lange bis er einen Lehrstuhl 
in Petersburg erhielt .Pawlov/ preist das Botkinsche Labor "es gab 
auch leider sehr selten und interessante und instr ktive bespräche 
mit Sergei ^etrovich ^otkin.In der Botkinschen Klinik bereitete er 
seine Thesis über die Herznerven vor hier begann er seine Unter 
suchu.gen über die Verdauung die ihm später so vie, Bughm eintrugen 
Diese beiden Untersuchungen aren voneinander unabj hängig. ßr v/urde 
erst 1890 Professor als er schon verheiratet war uad einen iohn hatte 
er lebte in sehr beenbgten VerhältnisaenAber er hielt durch dank der 
Hilfe von ""reunden "und seiner -Leidenschaft für^-^hj^siologie" . 
Br erhielt ''den ^ ehrstahl mit 41 •'ahreni^r \mrde rofessor der Pharmako 
logie (später Pysioiogie) An der 'Militärkedizinlschen Akademie und 
Chef der Physiologischen Abteilung des Instituts fpr L'xperiment lle 
Mediziner hatte zwei Posten , genügende finanzielle A^^ittel und ein 
eigenes iiaboratiorium, wo er nach i^elieben seine Porschuagen durchführe 
konnte .Vorher musate er trotz seiner Mittellosigkeit für Jedes 
Bxperi enttier aus eigener Tasche bezahlen. Pawlov/ sagt dass er für imme^ 
seinenVater uad ^^lutter dankbar bleiben wird,d8ss sie s s ihn gelelirthave 
ein einfaches ansprachslcses Leben zu furhren u^.d dass sie ihm ermöglio 
haben, eine e hörhere Bildung zu erzielen. Pav/lows -^eben war ein 
vorbildliches ^elehrtenleben und er rühmt auch in dieser Hinsicht 
Ludwig und ^^eidenhain,die ihr ganzes -^eben ebenfalls der '-isse ischaft 
Y/irdmeten.^^^^^^.^g^g vonieinader haben übrigens Pawlow und ^^eidenhain 
eine Pankr easoperation ausgedacht , die das Fu ktionieren der auchspei 
cheldrüse zu untersuchen ermöglichte , ohne das Tier umzubringen. 
Di^se Operation wie überhaupt die besc!iäf tigung mit den Drusen 
des L'rnährangskanals haben die späteren iirfolge Pawlows ermöglicht 
die .ja hpuptsäohlich auf der F^in Beobachtung der ^unktion der 
3peicheldrüsen(im Munde' gründeten. Pawlow hnt auf uru-d seiner 
Arbeiten hervorgehoben, welch p^ewaltige Uacht die experimentelle 
Ph^;siologie besitzt und wie sie ihren hohen itand nach einigen 
Jahrzehnten von Bxperimentierung erreichen konnte. i^ies schien ihm 
geradezu ans Wunderbare zu grenzen. Der Jebergang zu psychischen 
fragen lag auch sc :on hierweil Pawlow bemerkt dass Personen mit 
schlechtem A.ypetit keine Sekretion von i^agensaft aus psj/chi^chen 
Grundlage haben, daher stärkere chemische ^^ittel zur Anregung des 
Apnetits brauchen. Es muss betont werden, dass ja wenn einem der ...uid 
beim Anblick eines weissen l'ischtuchs zur Essenszeit wassert, 
dies ein Bedingungsreflex im oinne der Pawlowschen Theorie 
weil der unbedingte , angeborene Beflex sich -d.h. die Spechei- 
sekretion sich sonst nur bei Berührung der Speise mit der 
Zungenspitze ereignen sollte. 

Pawlow erhielt den xlobelpreia 1904 und hielt am 12. Dez. 
d.J, die Rede bei der ^erleirhung des -^reises.üir weist darauf 
hin, dass die Art der ialiva ,die die Speicheldrüsen sekretieren 

von den Speisen abhängig sind, die 3aliva ist vm der iJahrung abhangig 
bzew. davon ob dies eine unsohädliohe oder eine aohödliohe ^ubst mz 
ist z.B. eine Säure ,in welchem Falle eine wäaarige reiche Salivasekre 
tion erfolgt .um die uundhoehle zu säubern. Pawlow erzc^hlt m seiner 

^eäie dass vor 10 Jahren Alfred Jobel selbst^ih m und seinem Freund 
^entaky für ihr Laboratorium ei^e grösseren _^6trag zugewendet hat. 
3r erzählt aber auch über die '»osi/cliische '^iiPreguag " die reizbare 
Tiere erleben wenn sie so dass der blosse ^nbliok von x^hrung ihre 

gastrische Drüsen zur Sekretion bringen .liin psychischer Faktor 
der WU' soh zu essen regt die gastrischen Drüsen an. Psychischer i^eiz 
der Anblick des Gregenstandes von der erne ,regt die Schleimhaut an 
Der Anblick von Brot wird eine stärker« Sekretion von Saliva herrvorru 
fen als von Fleisch obwohl der Hund das Fleisc'r vorzieht , eben weil 
das Brot mehr 3aliva zur Aufweichung braucht .Psychische Reize reprodu 
zieren die physiologischen Reize . enn man aber den Hund wiederholt 
mit Essen reizt, aber es ihm verweigert , dann hört die Sekrettion 
bei ; Anblick des Essens auf .Aber wenn man ihm das -^rot nur einmal gibt 
ist die Wirku-.g von der -^'erne wieder hergestellt . .Aber die Sekretion 
kann gehemmt werden darcü ausserdordentliche Reize (visuelle , Hörreize ) 
In dieser Rede hat Pawlow die Grundprinzipien des ^edingungsreflexes 
vereits festgestellt. Er sagt dass "die -^eize die von der Ferne wirken 
als ^^eflexe bezeichnet werden können... Die Sekretion der .jpeicheldr..sen 
ist durch äussere Tatsachen hervorgerufen, aber ¥NBiäc^:^«*i'*f^gfvohnliGh^ 
ÄÄöaxxkKXXfiXgaralÄÄXJdbdt physiologischen c)pecUelrefll9X6^p^>^^^ ^" 
Mundhöhle herrührt ,wärhend der andere durch die Augen ,die "ase 
undwsw hervorrgerufen wird.Der Untersooied zwischen diesen beiden ^ 
I^eflexen besteht dari,dass der alte physiologische Reflex konstant ist 
der neue Reflex ist aber stets Schwaixkungen unterworfen, er ist bedingt 
Im erstereri Falle haben die Eigenschaften der Hahrung Jinflass auf 

die Art des Soeichels-HUrte , Trockenheit , gewisse chemische .Eigenheiten 
in anderen Falle sind es solche Dinge wie arbe ,di9 keiner..ei Bezie 
hune: zur physiologischen Rolle der Speichelsekretion haben, werden 
zu Stimuli (Reizen!. Sie dienen aber als Signale der urs nrüngliohen 
ReizRep:enstände.3ie bedeuten also eine bessere Anpassung der Speichel- 
drüsen an die äussere Welt. Die ^gnale haben nämlich nur eine bedmgti 
Bedeutung sie sind dem 'Techsei unterworfen, andederseits kommen sie 
"la mit den Schleimhäuten nicht in Verbindung, '^anchmal können die 
Eigenschaften der signalisierenden Objekte die Speicheidursen reizen, 
ein andresmal nicht. J'edes Phönomen der xiussenwelt kann kann ein 
zeitweiliges Signal der Objekte werden, die die .^pecheldrusen anregen 
vorausgesetzt dass d ;e Reizung der Schleimhäute des Llundes durch dieses 
Objekt einmal oder mehrmals mit mit der Aktion dieses Phänomens auf 

die anderen Rezeptoren der Oberfläche des Körpers verbunden war. 
m a 'Vorten wenn die Zuführung von Eahrung von solch einem Phänomen 
begleitet war oder besser wenn ±tai es ihr vorging. ^^Jerm aber die 
^Tahrung dann tagelangoder wochenlang dem Hunde vorweigert wird, 
dann verliert sich auch die Entwicklung des Jpeichelsekretion. 
Der Mechanismus der Jti ulation durch die Signaleigenschaften solcher 
Phänomene d.h. der x^iechanismus der bedingten Stimulation kann als 
eine Fu ktion des Nervensystems begriffen werden. Es gibt in diesem 
Fällen stets einen unbedingten Reflex d.h. eine Stimulation durch 
die wesentlichen Eigenschaften des Objektsl.lan muss annehr.-ien d-. ss es 
zenir'^len ^^er rensysten einen xunkt gibt, der durgh den unbedingten 
Refi.exgegeustand stark dtimuliert wird, so dass dieser Paunkt auch 
die schwächeren Reize die von der Aussenwelt zu anderen Pu,.kten 
des zentrplen ^ervensys.ems reiche kommen, an sich zieht, d.h^ dass 
dank dem unbed?ngten ^^eflex ein ein zeitweiliger ^^ervenweg geöffnet 
wird der zum ^entralpunkt dieses Reflexes reicht. geebnet 
Die Bedingungen aer Oeffnung und der Schliessung dieser ^^e^yQ^v^Qf® 
ÜkiöXKÄXiä sind die physiologische ^asis der feinsten Realtiyitat 
derlebenden Substanz, die feinste Anpassung des tieriscaen Organi 

Pav/low schloss diese ^ede mit der Behauptung, dass die einzig 

SsSliSÖfte.MfeWm^MÖ ^?Bt^l^S^i!a^aä?llkl?| t^iil die'^ltirwistenschaf 
die mit obj ektiven i^iethoden das <^eheimnis dieses -^ebens erschliesst 



• smus 

der 'nerwe?t'^''?n L" f *^'r^^' ^^'^^'^ ^«^ "enacien der 'ertreter 
3raoein,^n*ii ' "^^f "^^f ^'^esohanismas der hüohsten vitalen 

iriiS^Ji^rge^währt?'"^^^^"^^ "'^ -issensohaftliche .enlonethode 

^s sei vermer 
aer ^-eUaode betont, d.h. er 
sondern Phj^siologe bleiben 
in welchem sie zur Interpre 
aioh in ständige Widersuruo 
l'ebrauoh der objeoktiven ""^e 
^ede in welcher die Theorie 
wird, wurde auf französLsoh 

dem Titel "-es prix de 
und allen zugänglich. 


iit,dass Pawlow stets die Objektivität 
erklärt ,da33 er kein Psychologe sein 
will weil die Psychologie in dem Augenblick 
tationen von gesit.gen Tatsachen schreitet 
he und Streitigkeiten verstrickt .die beim 
thode ,ar nicht möglich sind. Diese 
des bedingten Beflexes auseinandergesetzt 
in Stockholm 1905 veröffentlicht unter 
1 en 1904»\ Der Inhalt war also weltbekannt 

an derön ^..if.« i. i,?^%^^^' ^^^^^^^e^ Obj ektivisten in drr^PsvShSloJi 
objek?i".^"n.^^tSod%''*'^^?,^:^.^^^ ^.-^- ein^ rein^' 

befür ortet, sie haben auch .jede 
c^nY^r^^r.^ ^ -ou r®^ sieht abgelehtn und daher nicaxi von unren 

dflcici «In ai-«/=»-H kx^4. ^''"*^^j -*w^w,oj.c? ixtLuvii auua jeae Voraussetzung 
^nfL^^'^.^^^L!?^^^"!"^^^«^^ abgelehtn und daher nicht von Ohren 

gesprochen. In 

logj; ve 

arbeitende Jaciuea Loeb '1900 in der "Pysiologie des ^hirnea"~19no 

bezelchnis'und^^^ o^f Sf "^ ^^^'«^*' ^'^ "asiociatfvea 'ellchtnJa 

PoJ hi^ /! objektiv beschrieben, aber sowohl assoziativ als anch 
auf innJ^H^'J^'f Offenkundig Bezeichnung sbjektiven Ursprungs d 
f.""! 7S^:^_^"_^^*^°^P«l^tion,die Pawlow u m jeden preis ve?L Wen will 

komparative ;,croIoi:i;;sor;rklLtedX\hn1^r\":^^^ 

er In de? ?orr«.T'^'' ^'?/'^ "cleutschen ObJekS^visten^'l^b^Luptet 

f l^ ^^\ V^H ^"^^ zweiten Ausgabe seiner "Psychologe from tha 
otandpoint of a Behaviorist (1924T.xiaohdem aber Yerkes bereits 1909 
den Aufsatz über die -fawlowache ^'e thode verBffentliohi- h!f i=i T 

1vk'?/°\''''" grundsätzlichen Artikel Watlonsfso ms aihm'diese ' 
Arbeit sehr gut bekannt gewesen sein, auch wenA er den ursprünglichen 
Aufsatz im Symposium von ^t ocksolm nicht gekannt h'?te das 

bereits seit einem Jahrzehnt bekannt war .Lashiev hat Über den Badin 
gungsreflex im Pwlowsohen ^inne 1916 in uer Psychologioal «eview 
geachriben und ea folgten sehr viele Publikationen if diesem dinne 

.h fii- S^ m- ^»^'i°!'3 benutzten seine Methode, um die Untersoheidunes 

^? ?J«!.«n /r'?^'^^?^"^\"!;^ ^^"'^^^ '^^' so|."Diskrimination" ^ 
oi. liesoen z.B.Gi en itinnigabel vibrieren die etwa mit 255 vibra 
tionen erachallte wobei dem Hunde Pleisoh mit vorsewieaen ™r^« 
Dann^erfolgt auch ohne fleisch bei dieser /ibrierf ig deruSex* 
aer ^aliva. Dann benutzt man eine -itimmgabel mit mehr Vbrationen 
also von höherer Tonhöe und j?ibt k^in ?leisch en dlo Sriifro 

ntmlich es fliesst nur dann venn bei der ^löhe dbei der .Ileisch 
gege em wird Man nähert dann die tönenden Jtimmgaben bis 256 nbrierun 
gen und kommt zu einer Höhe die ^ der Huna von 256 nicht mehr unte? 
scheiden k.nn und hat so die Diskriminieru gsgrenze des IinrtL ..n« 
-onen.Orbelli von aer Petersburger Jchule hfJ^IgSÖ "Die 0??en?ilr?n. 
des.llundea in l'önen •• verlof eentlicht,die sich damit beschal^ii?^ 

dpater mrden Orbellis Experimente bostötogt uad andere beza-lioh der 
sehstarke unternommen (besser 'J.tarscheidu g von Hgii und fc-i ) 

,,„ ^»v, *-wv Pavvlovs gehörte Bechterew, der aaen "Objektive Pav 

j^ en.Jr hat ftann "«■•■• • - ^ 

Zu den 

(xy^6 in dritter Auflage veröffentlich 

Ba3 beiiarioistisch^' ^rogranin v/arde am Vorabned des ersten ''/eltkri^'ges 
V€rfa3st,die dann eintretende rassische Devolution hat die Verbindungen 
zvv'isohen HusSjond and dem Aasland fast unterbanden, so dass die 
ursprüngliche Leistung Pawlowa in Amerika durch die ^ei turnst i:.nd0 
verdunkelt wurde. 

^. Pawlov; hr?.t bereits während einer Vollsitzung des 

.Aedizinisohen Kongresses in i^^adrid ±it im April 1903 eine Definition 
des bedingten ud unbedingten Reflexes gegen Die ^^ede "Bxperi lentelle 
Psyoholgie^U::d ?s;yohopathologie bei Tieren" v/urde in--^etersburg 19D3 
veröffentlicht .liier sagt er dass die ^-npassu :g der ipeiohelsekre tion 
an die Art der x^ahruugsmittel "Intelligenz'* schaut, eine Intelligenz 
die in ^ der Tat eine Anpassung des Organismus an die Aussenwelt 
bedeutet ,di se Anoasf^ung setzt aber keine weitergehende 'Einteiligen " 
voraus als eben eine solche untrügliche A npassung. 

Pav;low erklärt hier, dass der hautpsäohliohe ITnterschied 
zwischen einem bedingten und unbedingten -Reflex keinesv/egs darin 
liegt dass eder erste Auf Distanz wirkt (durch Augen Ohren ^<ase - 
und der andere in der Jähe denn es gibt auch andere Reflexe auf Distanz 
der ^unterschied ligt vielmehr darin^dass beim unbedingten R flex 
die v/esentlichen liigenschaften des Reizobj ektea mit denen des Hezeptors 
korrespondieren, während beim bedingten dies nicht der ?all ist, es gibt 
kein chemisches /erwandschaft zwischen der dchleimhat des Hundes und 
dem Augenbild. Das Tier wird hier durch 'i'öne ,Grer -usche angeregt Dies 
ist ein Phänomen weitergehender iinpaasung.-V/enn man die äusseren -^edin 
gungon ändert , versiegt der »ipeichel ,z.3, wenn man einen anderen 

Hund mit -Brot füttert ,Y;ird der Anblick von -Orot den Hund im 
iüxeriment nicht affizieren.üs erfolgt eine i^eflexhemmung (Inhibition) 
Llan muss auch zwischen motorischer -t^eaktion un sekretorischer Unter 
scheiden.denn das nah liegende Brot regt Sekretion an, das nur ganz 
fern erblickte Fleisch regt den Hund zu v/ütigen Bewegungen an 
"Wunsche" äuusern sich in motprisohen nicht in sekretorischen -^^eaktionen 
Die saliväre Heaktlon des Tieres mag subjektiv as oubstrat der elemen 
tären Denkens ,der Vorstellung betrachtet v;erden. ii»r sieht also 
die elementaren Denkvorgänge in den Heflexen. 

"Nur objektive Tntersu hung wird uns stufenweise zur 
vollkommenen Analyse der undendlichen Adaptibilität bringen in allen 
ihren ^-Manifestationen die das -^eben auf Erden bildet. die 
und nicht die ^ev^egungen der Pflanz^^n zum Licht und das Wahrheitssuche 
vermittels mathematischer Analj^se wesentlich Phänomene gleicher Ordnung 
sind sie nicht die letzten Glieder einer fast endlosen Kette von 
Adaptierungen, die in der '^elt der lebenden Dinge platzgreift?" 

Die Lebensphänomene die man psj/chisch nennt, und die wir in 
Tieren beobachten, untersciiieden sich nur durch den 6rad ihrer 
Komplexität von rein ph:;siologisohen Phänomenen. ...Der llaturwissenschaf 
1er sollte diesen Phänomen sich objecktiv nähern ohne auf die 
"Wesenheit dieser Phänomene einzugehen. -Pawlov/ v/endet sich dann 
gegen die Vitalisten "d.h. Animismus, der die verschiedenartigen Ge 
Sichtspunkte des i^aturwissenschaftlers und des Philosophen miteinander 

Am 28. Dez. 1909 hielt Pawlov; eine Bede "Ilaturwissensohaft 
und Gehirn" vor dem Ilongress der i-^aturwissenschaf tler und Llediziner in 
Moskau. liier nennt er dns Gehirn bezw.die höheren -^'eile des Gehirns 
des Organs der sehr komplexen Beziehungen des -^'ieres zur Aus3env;elt 
^"enn der ^iturv/issenschaf tlrr die niedri (unternen Teile des Gehirns 
und seine -^eziehuagen zur Aussenwelt betrachtet ,s rieht er von I^eflexen 


tätigkeit in Analogie mit seiner eigenen ^eistestätigkei t betrachtet 
npQweR-en hat dieser ^weig der Physiologie seit 100 •'ahren keinerlei 

Desv^eg' ~r - 

^. rtsGUi:ltt9i.9S2ielt.Ich^habe versucht . diese 7ntersuchungen auf rein 

|his|8S^l5|Söf5 ß&Maä&tl^aftä®Sil^?iSporLe''^^ ^""^^^ Beflexverbindu.egn 


Weiters untersuchte ioh den *"*eohani3mus der An?l?;satoren,d.h. der sog 
3inne3organe.^ie zeitvjeiXkge'^Beflexverbindu ^g erfolgt in den hiheren 
Teilen des Gehirns* Adf dieae V/eise können ^erüche .iTarben und (Bilder) 
Laute das Tier zu den IT aiirungs Substanzen anziehen. In den höchsten 
iiphären leistet diese Rolle die dpraohiaute •Diese Objekte sind so 
zahlreich dasa sie nur durch variable noicht durch konstante Verbin- 
dungen gedeckt werden- können. Wäre es anders, dann vmrde dies einem 
ijistera gleichen in dem ein Telephonabbonent permanent mit .jedem anderen 
verbunden sein v/urde statt mit meiner Centrale, die dies bewerkstelligt 
Der bedingte Reflex'bildet sich mit ■ ^Ülfe des U'ibediri^ten/Aber dieser 
Hefl X kenc^. von innep. , oder aussen gehemmt (inhibiert 7 v/erden, von 
innen ,weÄn er wertlos vi/ird, d.h. wenn trotz des Reflexes 9d.h. 
der »iignalisierung) das lassen nicht erscheint(Die ^pec^eldrüse als 
Signalorgah v/urde i^^^^n ih^er Blnfactiheit gewählt) Bö kann der 
Beflex aber- durch andere Aussensignale inhibiert werden, so dass 
man im allgemeinen zwischen Brzitation,Inhibtion und Disi-nhibition 
untersobeiden muss.^^as die Änal:^;sat.oren anbelangt so zerlegen sie 
die Aussenweltjöo z.B. u tetscheidet das Hörorgan des ilundea . 
Vibrierungen y^xi 8Q-90.,00Q in derxxtwigtir der kensch nur 40-50000 

oj:.or/o. .r-enc 3ekundÖt " ' ' ■/■-■' -^ .. r ■'• 

In de^" \6'ilMng däf'-konäitiöh^^^ Kefiexö nehmen 'die Anal;ysatoren 

teil, sie. verfeinern de^ Uechanismus.« Der Heflex wird auf eine gewisse 
Tonhöhe älbgestellt /die anderen werden durch einen He mmeilfirigsprozess 
ausgeschaltet^jenn das .Gehirnende der Anal^^satoren baso:- ud'igt wird, 
ist ihre Arbeit i^ehiger 'f6in,ei^ /^ird 'z ,3«liiöht und*. Ilelligneit .aber 
keine gyr^isr xi^s^skxjBcilHJSX einzelnen ^egenstädne unterschieden. 
- angeborene 'ütid ei'worbene' Seflöxe, H dpeziea. und des Indivi 

duums.(Hede nicht; gehalten in Genf 1914. Pawlow meint, dass zeitweilige 
Beflexe iDauärfeflexe werden können« * -- v'rp--i -r- 

,/as die Analysatoren anbelangt ,30 wirken sie zuerst 
in der Initialphase in der allgemeinen ?orm,erst dann spezialisieren 
sie äit)h.Aiso zuerst wirkt jeder- Ton, dann nur ein gewisser Ton. 


Interne , externe ußd ooglaf-^inhibition 


Als Grundgesetz Irradiation and concentration. 

... . . j ' fi : ■ . f '..", .' ^ ■ - r. . ^ r . . _ 

^r arbeitet seit 13 Jahren am conditioned reflex. 

Ax betont, da,ss er ala Reflexer scheinung das betrachtet was andere 
als -einen Akt der IFeberleguiig^ (beim)' :Iuad deuten, würden. 

In seiriem'Vortrsgsz3^klus übet die GehirÄhemi Sphären erwähnt Pawlow 

dass der Huss. Phvsiologe Setschenow zum ersten -^al 1863 m seinem 

Buch "G^hirnreflexe" die Aktion de'a^ehlrns als i-ieflextL tigkeit 

zu deuten betrachtete das denken -Is reflexti:tifgkeit in der 

d-^s 2effektende u*: affeüte a-'s uebertriebene reflexe 

mit crrosser ausstrahlung der 2xcit?tion.-Ii;r betont die Taetigkeit 

von Jennings,J-cquea Loeb und Thcrndike (Animal Intelligenoe) 

von der '^hrndikeschen "''ethad^e von trial and error wusste er nicht 

als er erieibhzeitig^ s^ini phj/siologisgaen ersuche an Junden unternahm 

Jr lo'bt ferner dii . BehariooriJtVn im egen^atz zu anderen Psjichologen. 

Er betraolitet Instinkte als Hatten voÄ Reflexen. 

defensive reflex, what is it reflex. -arental , social. sex^aal 
instincts.alimen'.arj? .--Die fundamentalste ,u d allgemeinste Tätigkeit 

der Gehirnhemisr)hären ist das 3ign3lisieren,aber die Anzahl der iignale 
ist unendlich und die ethoden der iignalisierung verschieden.! 

•fc •■* ^» y^ •'■^K.^A* •*• >^ 

(variabel ) 

Der Alementarreflex ist am prgitiaohsterijder sellDatdafensivö 

führt za grosser lürreguvg , der sexuelle ist schwierig and hängt vom 

Alter ab, — i:^nditioniert^ Reflexe vermoege neuer Bahnuigen* 

Sine Folliäion zwischen Bxzitation und Inhibition ^:.nn zu -neurotisohen 
zuständen führen d;h. zu chronischer Bxoitation oder Inhibition. Oder 
es fuhrt 3xcitation zur Inhibi^tipn uia^ InhibitigifiL ,^ur üxzitation 
Umkehrung ded rozesses. ^^ ^ 

^ ^ ' Caradox er Zustand wenn starke itimuli schwache Folgen haben 
und ultraparadoxer Zustand, v^enn Inhibitionen zuerst excitieren und dann 
väö-öige Inhibition hervorrufen. 

Schlaf ist feaf^nrt^^ije Irradiation der Inhibition, 

'Gfti^dnische Abweicheungeti eder höheren /^Nerventätigkeit die wir in 
Tieren hervorrufen konnten,ist rein^.. ■fe^.eujfjOset Auch traumatisolie ö: 
öen können durch aussergev/öhnlic he '^ * * • 

Il5?pnosis -irr-adiation of weak iahlbitors? process i 

Induktion (reziprok) zugleich mit Bxicitation, Inhibition and irradatio 

negative Induktion oder externe Inhi{)ition--Dynamic stereotype (S^stemisie- 

rung> '■->:'- 

Hervenaysteme oder Typen derTlere basiert auf drei- Grundlagen 
■ •" l)8tärhe des excitativen und inhibierenden prozessea, 
ihr Gleichgewicht und Bewegliclik^it (uobilitat ) 

1,) ötärke-stark und schv;ach 2,^ )... .„^.. , 
a) starke - eq.uilivbriei't oder nicht 
eq^ilibrierte starke in labile und tTgtiry inerte 


, i.V A.. i.» M 

starke nicht äquilibrierte -excitation dominiert über inhibit^oUr'rrAj.^t'X'^ 
exoitable impetuose typ '(cholerisch) nach Hippocratea 

:i ft -. 


%.)' starke equilibrlörte ,aber inerte Tphlegmatlaoh) 

S •) stark equilibriert lanil. lebhaft , aktiv (sanguinisch) 

'^4.1 schwach oder Tnelanchoiisch -leicht inhibiert 9dank" Interner ihhi 
bizion) u, externe Inhibition-^^auptmerkmal konstante starke Inhibition 

Dies sind Genot^perij ^^ gJh|r^kte;:^|o^|jiQ2jjii.g Phen§1^j'pe?^(duroh8 ^eben) 

Konditionierte Konnexion ei^tspripUt d^r Association durch Gleich- 
Ir^n^w- g^yVir-Hr^ igig Die Generalisiertui'g derselben ist Association durch 
zeitigkeit _^. ., 

Aehnlichkeit» Synthese urd ArialyÄö der^'könditionierte HeflexefAsso- 
ziationen) sind dieselben v;ir die gru dsätzl* Procesae der Gei^steii j 
tätigkeit. '^-^^ ^,^ - 

'i,\- 0" Der erste' und zweite System der Signale (durch Bede) Der aufsatz 
geaohri eben 1934 für, ^te LIedical S^oyplo^edivar^, ^ ^^^^ ,,.. 

Die fundamentalen ''qaetze die daa erste Systenjn dominieren ,doninie 
ifeh auch daa zweite V^ö^in ea handelt aich um dasselbe ^"^ervengev/ebe. 


Experimente mit Bedingten ^^efiexen reporpduzieren pathologische Zu- 
stände des mens 'il,' Nervensjistems-Nearcsen und gewisse psj^chotisohen 
33?mptome»i.ian kann auch die ..esundung bewerkstelligen, was v;issensphaft- 
liohe -Beherrschung des Phanffmens zeigt •-Gleiohgewichtsatö^^ung ist öitte 
Krankheit. Diese Störung hängt vom Nerventj^p ab.d.h, die Meurose und 
ihre Art h^ängt vom Tjpusi ab ob excitabel oder nicht 
Das inhibierte Tier wird, excitabel xmd gewalttätig- oder fällt in 
Schlafzustand.Im schwachen Typ ist die eurose depressiv, 

Exiöeriröentelle iJeutoseri dauern auch Monate handurch( Jahre) 

"Diese Tierneü¥öäeri köiinen mlWIäeurasthenie bei Menschen vergllogen" 
werden, (depressiv und excitier^t) ^ . . 





Beim Menschen sind zwei Signalsj/ateme je nach der Prädominanz ^ 
des' einen oder ^anderen können die menschen in denkenden öder küilä'tle 
rischen Tj^pus eingeteilt v;erden.In pathologischen Päkllen v/erden die 
einen^Psyöhasteniker , die anderen H^steriicer v/erden. ' ^'^- 

^bsessiön' (^et*foigung3wahnsinn-Döiudsionen ist der ultra- 
paradoxer Zustand (Kr et schmor Inversion, Janets sense of possession ^, 
Katatonische 'Form der 3chiÄophrenie die aus' h.ypnotischen Symptomen 
besteht, kann als Schutzinhibition betrachtet v;erdqn 

Wenn Stereotypie ,iHKrk±Ä, Iteration , Perseveration die ^uelle 
in de* t^athölogiscfaen Inertia d6s ecxzltalSo'f Ischen -Prozesses, hat 
dann muss die obsessive neurpais Uud Paranoia denselben "'echanismus 

ZirktlläriiJät'- der nervenaktion -Störung der Wechselbeziehungen*^^ 




\ Zirktll 
zwischen Bxzitation Uiid Inhibition, die perioden der excitation Ixx 
inhilDition dauern nioiit 'feine Stunde öder ^?äg sondern einen 1.1 onat''-'-^ 


Ph;^;Siöldglsche Phänomene und ^ISriebÜftöse 'der äu^.j'efctV welt^'"' 
sind intericonnektiert und fleiessen zusammen. 

Die "letzte Rede '^ die Pav/low an seine kollegejD zu riohtn glaubt ^ .. 
war der 14.kongr. intern, der ph3^siologie ro m^i^pt .^,1^32 ' i- r ^ ru - .- . 
"Phvsiologoe der höheren Herventätigkeit". 

Das zentrale physiologische^ Pjiänomeu der Arbeit, der Gehirn 
heÄisphäreri- ist der bedingte i^efleii-ge'ilig^nt^ "A'söo^fatlon''' duch die 
Psychologen. Emotionen §ind die komplexesten unbedingten, Reflexe. 

Die ^ehirnhe.iispären des ^^undes bewirken^ ^:ynthese und >-nal:;se d 
Äe'r' Reize die sie"'erreichenlirid "dies ist das k'ohkrete elementare 
x^enken. Dieses bewirkt Adaptierung, des ^'r-ranismus ,Gietchegva,cht pit 
der 7mV/ert^'^-Die^''lst die höhre iietventätlgkeit-hicht' äie ps^^chische 
cwe man früher sagte, die ander,e Alittvitäten 4^3 ^ehii^ns und des 
spinal cor dll^üdkenfeark'Vä^llt^^'^^^^^ die niedrigere ervehtctl-gökt 
bezeichnet werden., . , ' ^ ^^,.4 

Exijitation und Inhibition sind die , zwei "'rundtätigekten ^^^ ^ 
der "z^ritTalen ';ervenp.ktivltät ' ' " ' " -• "'- %^^ 

xransmarginale Inhibition durch 'ater,Ina nition 
:i3;pnose 3c!r^;tich€fV'^^'Diea ist di'^ ''ren^^e der ' '^irkarisarnköit fc^ffiGiericy ) 
Inhibition irradierend produziert oohlaf 

ti^: liohlaf knhn durck irradiation der Inhibition -oder d\irch liindaia-iiung' 
der Stimulation entstehen. 




Gesetz des I^iHmSfisetze ; Irra iation, negative Indaktion,3amr:iati 



Freiwillige Willens'bei'/egungauf.volunta^r.s yo],itional movements) . 
sind ein konditionierter assoziativer "?roz633. 

Alle konditioaierten ^-^eflexe begenen einander kollidieren werddn 
s^st^Tiiatis^r^l^i^es ist ^eine '^'enden^ zu einem d^^namisohen dtereot^p 

itarke uneciuilibrierte und schv;ache excitable und inhibierte 
Tj/pen eignen sich für iohaffüng von experimentellen •^^euroaeh. p^^r "i^^^^v 

Daemmeizustiände def'^tl^sterie tind "^r^m^'^äller fleriSöheri 
sind-ein^-.Bölö^^^ig der imaginatiyeu.ej^^.ten »Signale und der 
Emotionen Der ia^^pnotis che Zustand sohliesst schvltet ab das Orgrin 
des zweiten oigüals^stems ., den aktivsten -^'eil d^s gehirns dessen Funk 
tionen im wachen Zustand vorherrsohen, der sowohl reguliert als auch 
inhibiert (Jie ersten. Signale und die emotionelle ätigkeit. 

,;. All dies ^eigt- di.e,^ enge Verbindung. z..ioChen Ph^-siolo^ie udn 
Psj^ohblbgie .1921 hat Walter' Ilunter in der 'B'otschaft ' als PrEsoderit 
der .^nraer .; Pöjicia.. i^eö,n) .sicii bemüht diese zu trennen a^er 

vergeblich Er ist Ssj^ohologe-Behaviorist 


oumma^^ of . Ha suj. ta ( 1 

'.i i.' f ^ 

publ. 1912-lS 

Jeben den Analj^satoreh (Auge , Ohr , Haut, Sase tind liund , noch andere 
inn^^re ^-nal^'satoren - motor,is,che.p: Anal5;ßa.tor|Anal;^sator der Bewegungen) 
Von deri G-elenken, Flechsen (Sehnen) gehin^'entripetale 'Nerven ,die 

jedes, De-t^il der -Bewegungen signalisieren. .In den xlervenzeilen des 
Grehirns muss der Anals^^^-tor der Sevjegungen sein. ' * -' *•''•' 



l)ie GehirnhemlspK. analysie'retl die Ans sen und Innenwelt 

r ,.r 

(.' ••' 

Ali^eipeine T^^-oen der hö^-i^en tierischen und menschl. i^erven 
(19557 ,5ie..3r-q;rMi^&ö v/urden in Iloltuschi durchgeführt , .jetzt 


im Pawlow Institu't,.:.( i^^ in Pawlowo (früherem 

Xol-tui^chi) aj^-...., -s^..'. 


0.7.17(7 6 a 

^TLTcr.r r,5ier.e..,eing,9teilt ,x^,Qh der itärke des Sxcitatorischen Pro 
zess'ea 'irl starke und schwache 

Zv^eites Prinzip Gleichheit oder 7ngleichheit des excitatorischen 
uid inhib torischen ^rozesses' (wir meinen die höh-re aktive körtilcale 
Inhibition > (interne) - die . 2;,usamaen mit der Bxzitatiqn ^ das aieiohg^- 
v/icht deö Individuumä mit dör Aussenv/elt aufrechterhäit .*3ie hilft der 
Ana3,j[;a# ^^.^X Beze,ptQröu,,CA»^sl9SQhiing, Differenzierung ,Hetardierung) 

.r; Tiere ohne Inhibitor isohe pq,i.ktion entwickeln "^""eurosen. 

Daher die Einteilung in etiüilibrierte und lue luifibrierte. '^ 
Unter den equilibrierten sind manche st^rk reaktiv mobil und lebendig 
die andere v;enig excitabel und trag- i^ies hängt V^b von der I.Iobilität 
der iiervenprozesse., .^ . 

r ^ 1 

^;.r u 

Die sohv/^chen .lypen -nicht adaptable 

uuter^^qja starken ,,^nß^^ii.j^brie;|:t< .m4^ starker Exzi tat ion impetuos 

■ (Ärigestüm, heftig) ^ ' ^' ' ' ^ ' ^ . ' ■T-i '"^ -T-ir':' 

stferke und etjuilobrierte -sind ruhig oder leteädigdobhaft ) 
melancholisch, ojaolerisQhjpJtilegmatisoh , sanguinisch 

Zretsohmera j^pea.alrui,,^^ sind unseren 


ungestümett am ähnlib listen, "'oder "den Öholerischen des^Hippokrates 

aeine Schizotymen Uü^erem aohvmelien. Typ ;den -lelätiohollicern des 

^„„v,*. , 2arUckge2 0genheit und 3ohvjeigsamkeit(Helmlichtun) das 
dfl^^Jnt? r^c^^'' ^chizothymen iat .nur ein Hinweia auf i±e KompleAÜ'ii 
itlrv^ ri^^^^A^"^^ J't^ ^®"' Zurückgezogenheit als Besultat.-A^jer auch 
starke I,n(iiyiduen haben scloljff Merkmale. ■ , ^ 

lVrtTr^v?»"^^"^*-!!?uf°4?^^^*^^«°^ Pawlow ist ^"chlaf eiiie Inhibition die 

ita KOrtex entsteht die sich auf die tieferen Teile -unteren) 

des xlervensystems verbreitet Schlaf und i^p H^i^nose gelten ihm Als ' 

uidentisch_ nur die Intensität und Ausdehnung der Inhibition 

ist versoliieden. - :.. c/--.,^.>3- . ^ic.w. . W^■/.■"ft. 

.,: ., j .jerY|i:faktivitaet besteht attö BxzitÄti'tin und InhiTDll'iön 

hr«itfn\*^^^°^ .'^^' Inhibition öchlaf tri§keit einsetzt , die siShver 

«u^^J^hS''«^! ^^? V^' f ^^. .'fP'^^^e ^^^ Schlaf es. -enn inhlbition 
ausstrahlt and sich verbreitet, erhalten wir ächiaf 

^?J?irv'.'rhr^?5!i'^!t f ''t '^^e^« "^f^ •iohlaf, sie ergreift nur kleine 
■.l^h ifi^rf?^!^ ^^°^ aber, bis sie von dem Zortex zum Subkortex 
sich verbreitet, . ,;•:..,.„ ;,, TfT.u-a-'/ , a-;, - - •- 


äohläft pV Pin '■^''■7«!ür K^^ ^t^^^^uf^"" ?^^ ^^^"^^^s a»^^ ei"J^l zerstört 
sßSl J?? nfr n,^^; —'enn aber die Sehirnshemisphären extirpiert werden 
schlaft der Huad auch e^n, i .t n > ^> . . ^ "%.""" 

d h wort!^"^^!?^? K?^^ ^^*'' arbeitet vor allem das zweite iignalsystem 
J;^■-?f^!L*^^''^^w^^^5®^'''^^^"^"-^*^^ einsöhläft wird das hx Ivieite 
^ifS«iS?«^o i''^:^^'''* S^'f t^^ Bilder, d.h. die Kesultate des erslJen . 
?«l?K?^^^^-?^-*^''u^^®'' auf .daher, träumt man.. Beim sonstigen Denken -" -'^^ 
inhibiert das höhere System die Aktion des niedrigerenTDazu Ikommt 
positive Indu^ti9r%.|e|m ein..^il inhlbiwt wlrd.wSd SeSdere^ngereRt 
H3;pnose ist nur partielle Infiibition.iohlaf totlle, daher Bapport if ^ 
Hyp.^gf.^^,mit dem JJypnotisoor-. >. - ' ■ . •"'**'>'.^f "f: ^". .0 







JorS^ivf /1 on H^^u^''^°^*.® Im der höheren rierventätlghelt" -' 
der Tiere (l916,24.iIov. gelesen im meeting der Petrograd Philosophischen 
Gesflllaghafl;. (publ. m? "Journal der Pssöhlatrie ^ -A'^^i^u» .••^"Hsypiiiscnen 

•. 44.^ / ^! gibt avvei Arten von ^^eflexen , die einen ainä reift- ^"'''^ 
leitend (oonductiv),er ist angeboren, der andere ist erworben und 
richtet 310h nach der Erfahrung. Ss gibt bvir viele angeborenen '*' 
?!^®n ??^®i ^^®r ^ndendlich viele indiv iduelle.Dle angeborenen 
^^^«^."«^l» 4%?-nie,drigesen.^eile des ervens^stems .die individuellen 
der höheren. 

^.fö-, «u .ro ^^3 Si^* a"-oh Ana ^satoren wie es -^rläraen gibt diw'il cht 
od«^ "ösonatoren.die Töne zerlegen. -Die Speoialisierung der 
AnaljsatorenffUr 'iJoene) ,.L'>,-.y.An v./5«.->t,© ..■oi.ö arrst^; •..;. 

/M*^ , \ u ..^ '''®'^'^ "^"^ ^^S^ "^^^ '^^"^"i ^efie aber verstehe nicht 

{Uuak7 so heisst dies nur das 3 seiner Analysatoren besc ädigt 'sind und 
er 2War i^lcht .on Schatten aber nicht dia ^egenstäi ' 

.nde voneinander 


unt'-rsclieldet. . . ,.;,.^ .:... n. »...>...-., .- - ,. 

, A ^u- '^®^? Konnexionen mit der Aussenwelt, höhere Form der Analijs 
is der Phänomene der Aussenwelt f Inhibition) erfols-t t/enn der ^■■■^,^^ . 
konditionierte ^eflex nicht wirkt. 

I e 

1930 tihd 1932 entwickelt sich eine Diskussio 

n zwischen dem 



Amerikaner Sdwin R.Guthrie und PaYa.o-^ ^Xm piskusslon in der "Psyp^^o^-^^- 
logioal fieview" Guthrie sohri'eb eiriöti Aufsät^Ä "Co nditioning as 
a prinoiple of .learniugV' »i^er Psychologe glaubt ,das3^i.onditionieruQg 
ist ein ^rinzop des "Lernprozesses und dsss dies -/eiter nicht 
anai^s^^Ql ist.,de.r ^^hvsiologe glaubt ,es ist anal.vaabel.obwohl diese 
Procesae auch Association 'durch Simulataneität oder konditionierte 
,;;efi,öx$ -gex^a]^^,vier^^ei^^ s^^t Pawicjw^^^.. ^ , ,^,^j^,^ . 

. ,. r . Gut'-rie wollte fÄStateXXea.dass :die xteattipu des Tieres 
^^^.xu äVF'den konditionierten Jtiximulus zur iick^uf ühr n Ist Sondern äuf 
moto kinaestUetiSQhe itimuli die aus dem i^Qerker. jLoramen infolg^ 
Aufmerksamkeit in age spannt em Zustand asw.dies ö verursacht aiö 
Sekretion^ ^Guthrie, hat £pate^.^:i.n, einem artlkel -Wieder ^a.^auf. hinge- . 
wiesen ,das's man ps^ycholbgische -^rozesse durch ph:;äiölogische Tnter- 

....auQÄungen, nicht ^^J^äpö^^^ ^^*' . ' '^^^-^ ■ 

K.a^Las^Lay half w^^der 1929 vor,.. uem.Inteyn^.aongr . der .?s:;cholog:; 
in 1929* gehalten in ^Amerika Basic ^^eural echanism in ehavior ^ 
wieder dUe -^Qhauptjuag aufgestaut , die ^ntelXigenz sei, ei.ue allgemeine, 
Eigenschaft uad lalsae sich nicht aufläsen in ^^eflexe etc. i^aa otudium 
der /^eflexe sei ,, nur ,., ein Hindernis in d^r Ui^^tersuc^uag der^^^ 


• ^i)arauf ervvirdert Pa^acw .,dies sti.,.^e Qloht^uad. verweast 

darauf dass seine" IIa ter suchungen auf drei irrinzipierL sich stUtzenl^: 
Petarminismus, Analyse wd. ca;yntji^i?e and jJ^namik ,u,£.d,,^tpktur ,die 
aufeinder abgestimmt sind» 

^ /!r ■- et •• •; 


^.v f fj 

"Die gründiegenden Prozesse der kortikaieri Aktivität öind 
Sxzitation und Inhibition, ihra Bewegung in-der„,;porm vonMastrahlt^ng . 
'"lind Konzentration und ihre reziproke Induktion. .Die -speziellö 
Aktivität der .Gehirnhalbkugeln besteht in ,stae:adiger Anal;^^se up.d^.i?^n. 
these der Stimuli die von aassen u. d inriön kommen.^-- 

•> ••»■■' («. ^ 


Jashlp^'tiellpUTvtete dasa' inteingenz^rirclit vö^^eii' 
IckBUßiertßn 3,tr.ukturen ^d,ea..5eWrns, abhingt .^ ordern von der Total.., 
"äiasse der Gehirrisubstanz .Dies gl-ubtn er^urch die Hatten in elnem 
-abT;rinth zu-beYveis^n .denen ;er i;Qil9 4?a ..ehirmsuextirpie.rt a^/t. 
Pawlow erwidert, man koenne nicht alle "-^ezeptoten extiriMeren, gewisse 
bleiben und werden stirauliert un .AiQ.j;]atte.^,pp^^r4^^^^^^^^ 


Prinzip der Autoregulation beim>^.ensqhen. . 

lO* Int. Gongr...PsyohQlogista.. goponhag^n, August .24,1932 . ._ 
^-■■-"^ DVnamic'stereotT/pe ' der'^^ören Gehirnteile 

TTenn "wir von unseren Hunden. die Pormieru^^g von neuen kompliziertne 
Stereotypen verlangten, wir stiessen nicht nur auf den schmerzhaften 


Prozesa .den wir hier erwähnten, sondern,. wir konnten auch, ohrnqsche 
''''■]Jervenkrankheiten,^eur*osen,hervorrufen, die man späterbbehandeln mus 

li'chkeit* d'iJ'^yiiäiön^V^^ iÄ2'e4i %nd aäSienfVorrede 



Ueber die iriögllclkeit* dlJ'^yiiäiötf iÄ2fe4i %nd ai 

zum Buch von A^Q.Ivanov-imolensks Die Pu. damentalprobleme dqr Pathp- 
physiologie der höheren Nerventätigkeit (1933 Medizinische Staats 



•^ •• ; "<■ I"» " "** 

, . . Bxpeiimentelie \9^xoaen- i^iay 10^1934 eiu ;ort-.rag im 
instiWt'fur die^erfektioaxeradg der Aerzte'' Leningrad (publ. 1935 ) 

Vor 35 Jahren payohisohe öekretion von Speiohel -Untersuchungen 
gjg^tation UQd Inhibition- ihre Stärke, ihre Mobilität d.h. Inertia 

oder Labilität 

-und sohlieaslioh das .Aeci.uilibrium.:3^'vy4.30hen diesen 


Wir küunen diese "^rozesse pathologisöi machen. 
1) duroh eberanstrengang des exoitativen, des inhibitorisohen 

uad "^eberanstrenguag der Uobilität der llervenprozesse. 
Diese vmrde auch genannt vorher die Kollision der exzitativen 
und inhibitorisohen Prozesses. 

Ueberlasrtang des exoitativen Prozesses durch einen 3ti ulus 
ausserordentl. stärke. -»Y/enn man die Inhibition zu sehr verlängert wird 
sie pathologiaoh. — \7enn man aber den exoitierten Zustand der Zelle 
in einen inhibitierten uud vice-vorsa . zu .plötisligti verv;andalt 
treten pathologische ^'olgen ei n^ Dies kann nur bwei grosser itürke 
und Labilität ver der-^ervenprozess^rr^ermieden w.erd6ia.##, 

Die Resultate diese morbtfizi er enden ^^ethoden;. Die überlastete 
Zelle arbeitet nicht mehr gemäss der .stärke der auf sie einwirkenden 
Stimuli, sondern verschieden starke »Stimuli heben den gleichen, Effekt 
Dann tritt die Phase ein,dass stärkere Stimuli v/eniger Effekt haben 
als schwäche, dies' ist die paradoxe Phase. Dann respondiert die Zelle 
nich-. mehr dem positiven Stimulus , hingegen hat der inbitorische itim- 
lus einen posltivön oAff ekt-dies. ist die ultra-paradoxe Phase. 

• Die Excitation kann auch- persistent werden und weicht nur wenig 
der Inhibition. Da man zvvei "^i^v^^ ^©^ starken tiere unterscheidet 
phlegmatische und sanguinische, bei welch letzteren,- eine raschere 
~ -^ ■ - ^ ^ . ,-._.- -/-ui. g^^Qi^ rascher. Im pathologischen 

ent. f-DntholoRisohe itaRmnation) 
^^. patJJioiogiscae xiaDixiua^ veuubpxx«jiio ooux xclov^ü u.«* aj^w*vc*N/^-"*aber 
wird schwach und bankrott sehr rasch (Bxplpslvitft) 

Dor'ch uebermässige verlaengerung der Inhibition (externer 
Stimulus aktion) kann zerstören die inhibitorische Fu ktion der Zelle. 
Inhibition kann aich rasch entwixyjeln un-d verschwinden oder protrahiert 

se in 

'im neurotischen Zustand entspricht das Tier nicht den Bedingungen 

der Existenz—In kastrierten Tieren kann man neurosen leichter hervor- 
rufen. Innere Konflikte bei Menschen rufen neurosen hervor# 

Es gibt auch spezifisch menschl.i^eurosen,ps3;chasthenia 
und h^s terie. connected with speech- Bruch der Verbindung der 
zweiten und des ersten üignaiS3?stems und des suboortex. 

Wir koennen diese -Krankheiten auch heilen (Bromid,Huhe , 
JulvSO 1935 II Intern. Oongr .l^eurologists ^ondon(published in "20 
yeara of objeotive studj; of the higher nervous activity (behavior ) 

of ani::ials 6th ed. 1938 ^. , u ^ 

'üj^pes of higher i^lervous activity ,ihre beziehung 

zu neurosen Uud ps^^chosen and der ph^/siologioche mechanismus 

der neurotischen and psychotischen Sj^mptome ♦ 

Kraft der beiden grundlegenden Uervenprozesae : Excitation 
und Inhibition und die Korrelation mit ihrer Intensität, Gleichgewicht 

und ^ev/eglichkeit. - 

(Jemaeas der Stärke des excitatorischen ^rozessea 
schwache und starke ,die starken in e luilibrierte und nicht 
äquilibrierte je nach der Beziehung der Excitation zur Inhibition. 
Die starken equilibrierten in ruhige und lebhafte .-Dahrt gibt es 
vier Tvpen -den ungestümen, (starken, den equilibrierten und Ht gr ^c m 
^ *-— ^^- starken und rhigen und den euolibrierten starken und lebhaften 

und den schwachen. 


Dies entspricht den vier grieohiaohen fhippokratisohen T:^;pen) oholeriso 
phle gm, sanguinisch, raalsoncholi seh. 

Das auftauchen des zweiten Signalsystems bei menschen 
dessen Worte sich auf das erste beziehen. sowwohl auf das von innen 
alS: auch das von aussen kommende '^ignal .Einteilung der LlensQhen 
in den küsntlerischen, denkenden und die ^ebergangst^/pen. Diese 
einteling ist nicht nur in einzelnen sondern in. nationen fühlbar. 

Die ungestümen und schwachen [D:;pen unterliegen m.ehr der ""'earose. ,.. 
Die ungestümen werden der Inhibition betraubt, in schwachen werden 
die konditionalen, reflexe chaotisch — ICretschraer .pprkennt nur zv/^ei 
Typen an, die unseren schwachen und starken entsp^reohen. ui'd verbindet 
die erateren mi)t oSCiiizophreuie.die letzteren mit mani^chr^ep^^'^ssivem 


l^turagthenie ist bei intermediaeren (Zwischeri)und sohv/achen 
Typen heimisch.Hysteriker sind allg. schwach plus artistischer Typ 
die Psychastheniker (Pieere Janet's t.ermonolog e) ist schv/aQh und den - 
kender T^^p.Sei Hysterikern die allgemeine söhvmeche hat einfluss auf 
deas zweite »Signalsystem , das .jedenfalls in den artistischen 
Tapen den Vorrang vor dem zv/eiten hat. waehrdedn in den normal entvackel 
ten Individuen das zweite System vorrang geniesat. als höchster 
regulator des menschlichen Verhaltens, i^aher dio chaotische Form der 
Aktivität des ersten iignalsystems, und Uiigeheümte SniOtivitat verbunden 
mit der Zerstörung des allg.j^iervengleichgewicht.In den Psychastenikern 
die allge.Livniuß ochwä-che berührt die ->eziehaL.gen zwischen dem Crganis 
mus und dem Umgebung, das erste Signalsystem und die emotive Basis .Daher 
Abwesenheit des %alitätssinn& und das i'ühlen der Inferiorität im Leben, 
ständige Phobien und Obsessionen. 3o verstehen wir die Psychosen U:id 
Ileurosen in B ^erbindu ige mit den menschlichen Typen. 

*- ^ . \ 

Schwäcfiuüg der Sxzitation führt zur St^rkting der Inhibition 
Schlaf , Hypnose mit der paradoxen- und ultraparadoxen Phase 
(Narkoplepsy ,Oataplexy , catalepsy, sentimenta d^ emprise f Janet ) Inver- 
sion (Eretschmer ) , .Katatonie .-3ch7;ä.chung d r Bxcitation .durch 
üeberlastuag oder Itolliaion mit Inhibition. 

atörungen der- Mobilität : pathologische Mwkt^ijtxtr Labilität 
und Inertia.(486) 


Symptomatologie der ilysterie (1932) 

fiKsm Bxcitation und Inhibition unterworfen zwei besetzen : 
dem besetzt der Irradiation und der Konzentration. — wenn Exoitation 
schwach ist, tritt Irradiation 'ein, wenn stark, Konzentration, wenn zu 
stark, Irradiation. 

Bei -^onzentiration tritt in der ganzen Umgebung 
Inhibition ein, ein Phänomen der Induktion (negative) 

Uebergrosae otimulation bewiikt Inhibition ,e3 gibt Sohweeilen 
der Inhibition nach oben und unten.-Die kortikalen Zellen haben 
eine sich ändernde Funkt ionspakapazi tat sie wird herabgesetzt durch 
AI term, Er Schöpfung Krankheit. 

Aktiver Schlaf ala Inhibitionserscheinung in den Gehirn 
hemispären, passiver Schlaf v^egen Aufhörena der ainnenstimulation. 

Die melancholischen Tiere feige unterworfen Qearosen, chaotischer 

naemlich der z^§$gi^ Siteß&ün^^^^^^^y^^^^- CPierre Janet). 



uad den 

Induktiou auf daa zw e;p3te a^^at^m/den suboortex,der v/enige Inhibitio- 
nen kennte Wenn in Tieren der Inhibitionsprozess im ersten 
3igr;als3^atein aoi^waoh iätykönnen ähnlichen psych. Zustände eiiitreteri/ 
das das erste S^^stem den SulDkortex reguliert, Hysterie ähnliches 
kann entstehen wenn der Subkortex in Erregung gerät 

Jan,9..193^ Zoehler und^ die Affe,n..3r attackiert Lloehlers Buch 
oyohologisohe robleme in dem Toehler die ehavioristeu attackiert. 
"3r erwähnt dass die „ ehavior setn unsere bedingten Reflexe mit grossem 
Snthislasmüs akceptiert haben" (595 )llit einer datz erwähnt er Pawlow, 

.t.. ■ i >■■ 

^ , V j* ■ vjVi 

. : ■, • ', t •.-3 

« ■' r ■ ■ ■ > 

*f»- ' \ 

ÜB.n.ZZ.Ko^bleT ^Die -Tatsache der Association ist umso wichtiger als 
siemit dem py biologischen Tatsache der temporl-reu Konnexion zusamRien ' 
fällt. .sie bildet eine fundamentale Tatsache die Identifizierung des 
Psychischen mit dem. SomatiachQA, degaub3ek.tiYen mit dem ObjöktiTeiifeoO) 
Die Sinstellung der ^estalfepsychologie ist ein ?ejhlkonzept . 

Febr. 6 Sherringtpn attackiert., ^^ .,^-..^^^,,^... ase/^iya^' 

-^''-S»ebr. 20,1935 .-^egen idealismus des Pierre «^anet. 

(The apurpe^ 9,;f^thö Iilfrellf ot )Pys^Qhologistv and naur^oloi?ist ''''"^ 
ke irr ar 2 1 . i" ' ' "* ' 

^.. llaroh 27,1935?. .aiapa?ede-The ^en^ais of Hypothesla--'fimpIioation) 
Übt. 23, 1935 Zretschmer "Physi'iue and ^haraGter--.r macht 

Ikeine .IJnter,aclaKiduug .^wiaphenj^ Typus urid: Oharin;kter-^awi€öhen ängebdrerien 

und 'erworbenen ISigenscliaf ten. 

JPY. 5^1935 attackiert Bethe:v(a "PlastizitätÄ^:*^'^' 3i:.te?io".'' 
als Dualismus. 

^'"OBOJ :'J C i^-*--' iSvy 

aije . 

.'r^Jsr.'" 0«'^ 





bn^iö WC ■nxfiJ eÄ ,0J3 so 






o fv;! ■-- r ."^ '" 

r • 

•Ut^ o.':ii;^i/. nxierVToac-L. 

,'.i ni'JLirOQ tJo 

'•+• , - , »^ % 

n.-i i-n.!- xr.nj5. 

>r:o U -eS. '*^ iii: 3non c's vi ;r;:;o':o. 

^♦•-^^r-'^i In CD t;r;-= o^-»r: ed:t 





"^ Il.ÜLv'i.: 

' •■ r' r< a 

i*'>i;1:' s Id-i^-^^-i 

1 n : 

i£.¥im ß c're'vo'xr- 


J.» - ,. >U' ^^'i^ 

-■rr?*^. H r ? fl" ■r.*t"c 

■ BneJ b:: 


.i-j'.fj/O • 

- r^-t-f ."t-^ ' ' ■■ h'^ "^.^-^ .CP-^ ' 

•ri<rr"^j De'xc.' 


.t rc.^Liy 

Q':. ' 

+ tv'->7- 


1" C 

<■ < ■ , 

o ••- r. - 

r » 

«^*tÄ f-rfi"^ ^-.r^o-Tr/r^' 



, r »j;. 4-^ 'j 

1 1f*.^ 



Redaktion Radio-Essay 



21 .00 - 22.00 Uhr 

UKv/ ii 


5^^J±L^^_Zi^-y:£.^£P^^^ ^^^ Gegenwart 
Manuskripte Max Rieser 





bs 1^3.^ •^'•r>^ G^n; J^'^'i-J^^'^V' ^- s ::;üdi;vuc<;d.. n 
Ruiiof^nKS ü^^d dos Auto;s nicrt :»re{ w^r- 
j Y^.. " ViG3anz'j5ä5si:',GasMcni's!vript 
oJer Teile do.aus abz-cd. reiben oder in son- 
s:..-orV\-tis2 zu vc^rviclj'äkiqcn. Eine l3enutzung 
fü?Rc. ofunkrv/cdce bedarf ebenfalls der Ge- 
nehmigung dc-s Süddeutschen Rundfunks. 




Die ruesischG Philosophie der G-egen^art bietet ein eigenartiges, 
zum Teil widerspruchsvolles Bild. Obwohl sie bewußt partei^ 

maßig eingestellt und gewissermaßen der ideologische Ar 


einer ''revolutionären"' Gesellschaftsordnung sein soll, ist sie 
doch, was Ihr philosophisches Idiom anbelangt, sehr konserva- 


, sie steht der traditionellen Philosophie viel näher als 
die existentialistischen Pichtun^ien in Y7esteuropa oder die 
anal:/ tischen Pichtungen im englischen öprachkreis. Überdies 
hat sie in der Sowjetunion eine Verbreitung erlangt wie noch 
nie eine philosophische Pichtung in der Philosophiegeschichte. 
Dies kommt daher, daß sie zur Grundlage der sowjetrussischen 
Staatsverfassung gewoiden ist, zu einer Staatsphilosophi 
die eine ahnliche Bedeutung einnimmt wie eine Staatsreligion 
in den uns sonst bekannten otaaten der Geschichte. Die west- 
lichen Staaten mögen heute Laienstaaten sein, d.h. sie 
verkünden J^Ieutralität in Sachen des Glaubens und der Welt- 
anschauung, der Sowjetstaat beruft sich auf den .dialektischen 

Materialismus und den "arxismus als eine philosophische Lehre 
"* in jr , 

die- der Sowjetunion ausschließliche Geltung hat. Kritik an 
ihr ist nicht zulässig, und zwar auch heute nicht, ^lenn die 
veipilichtende Staatstheorie - also der Marxismus-Leninismus - 
als philosophische Theorie auftritt, so muß die Philosophie 
als solche Gegenstand erweiterten Interesses bilden. .lan muß 
die philosophisch-geschichtlichen Voraussetzungen der 
marxistischen Philosophie kennen, um sie zu vorstehen und man 
muß auch bis zu einem gewissen Grade jene Pichtungen kennen, 
die sie bekämpft. Man kann sie nicht einfach totschwoiAen. 

2 - 

precher) Die ''LibeTalisierung" der ideologiechen Stellungnahme nimmt 

die Form einer solchen Kenntnisnahme an. Iian nimmt die 
Ansichten der Gegner zur Kenntnis, man kritisiert sie und 
setzt sich mit ihnen auseinander anstatt sie wie vorher zu 
Ignorieren. erwähnt sie, um sie zu widerlegen oder zu 
verurteilen. In einem Aufsatz "Philosophie und Erziehung der 
Sowjetjugend" erklärt der russische Philosoph V.A. Steinbergs 

Zitatspr.s in der Sowjetunion erhält der junge .lensch nicht nur prakti- 
sche Kenntnisse j sondern auch eine Kenntnis der Philosophie. 
Die wirkliche Erziehung, die der junge Mensch erhält, erfolgt 
auf der Grundlage philosophischer Kenntnis, './ir betrachten 
die Philosophie nicht als intellektuellen Zeitvertreib müßiger 
Geister, wir betrachten sie nicht als Besitztum derjenigen, die 
d ie \/eisheit um der Weisheit willen lieben ... als einen für 
gewisse Menschen vorbehaltenen Gegenstand .. . wir verstehen 
Philosophie als eine Weltanschauung... und jedermann sollte 
eine bestimmte und wahre \''eltanschauung haben .... Im allge-- 
meinen betrachten wir die Sozialwissenschaften als wissen- 
schaftliche Grundlage der Pichtung der gesellschaftlichen 
Entwicklung. In der Sowjetunion wur=de der Historische und 
Dialektische Materialismus wirklich eine Philosophie der 
Massen. Jetzt ist die Sowjetunion das Land hoher philosophi- 
scher Kultur geworden ..." 


Man sieht also, daß die Philosophie in Rußland noch wie in der 

- 3 

1 Q 

guten alten Zeit eine ''v/cltanschauungslehr o •' ist» Dies ist sie 
z.B. im englischen Sprachkreis kaum mehr. 

In Rußland feierte die Philosophie ihr Dehut spät, nämlich im 

8. Jahrhundert in der Person des Grigori Skovoroda (1722-1794) 
der das Kommen eines russischen Sokrates herbeisehnte:, als 
erster meto systematischer russischer Philosoph gilt Pjotr 
Tschaadajew (1794-1856), den der deutsche Philosoph Schclling 
als einen der bemerkenswertesten -'lenschen bezeichnete, denen 

er je begegnet war. Tschaadajew verfaßte in Vereinsamung in 
lioskau zwischen 1826^-1831 elf •'Philosophische Briefe''', von denen 
zu seinen Lebzeiten nur einer, 1836, erschien, worauf 
Tschaadajew von amtswegen für wahnsinnig erklärt wurde. Die 
Zeitschrift, die den Brief veröffentlicht hatte, wurde verbo- 
ten. Rußland selbst wurde zum Problem der russischen Philoso- 
phie. Tschaadajew schilderte das Land folgendermaßen;: 

Zitatspr.! ""Zuerst brutale Barbarei, dann roher Aberglaube, dann grausame 

erniedrigende Fremdherrschaft, ein Geist, den sie dann 
unseren nationalen Herrschern vererbte." 


Ler russische revolutionäre Demokrat Alexander Herzen äußert 


sich über den Philosophischen Brief 'Tschaadajews aus dem 
Jahre 1836s Es war ein Schuß, der in der Pinsternis der ITacht 
ertönte und ob dies die Vorausahnung eines Borgens war oder 
dessen, daß keiner im Anzug war, jedenfalls war es notwendig 


zum ji:rv;acnen. Im gleichen Jahre, 1836, wurde Fikolai Gogols 
Satirc "Fcvisor aus Petersburg'' im Alexandrinski Theater" 

in bt. Petersburg aufgeführt, die ähnliche G-edanken aussprach 
wie der Brief Tschaadajews. 

Es ist für die Verhältnisse im kaiserlichen Rußland 
bezeichnend, dai3 sogar der Unterricht der Philosophie auf den 
russischen Universitäten von 1826 bis 1863 überhaupt als 
staatsgefährlich verrboten und dann bis 1889 stark eingeschränkt 
v^aro Eine richtige Schulphilosophie konnte sich daher dort in 
der ersten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts kaum entfalten. Was auf 
dem Gebiete der Philosophie veröffentlicht wurde, war als 
Literaturkritik oder ästhetische Betrachtung getarnt. Dies 
gilt namentlich von den Schriften der revolutionären Demokra- 
ten wie des erwähnten Herzen (der in die Emigration ging), 
dann von denen Bakunins , Nikolai Tsch er ny schewskys , Belinskys, 
Nikolai Dobrol jubovi's , Pissarews. und anderer. Tscherny schewsky 
und Dobroljubow waren Söhne orthodoxer Prister. Diese Schrift- 
steller werden in Rußland als Vorläufer des Marxistischen 
Denkens anerkannt und gewürdigt. Tscher nyschewsky war auch 
der Begründer der vormarxistischen realistischen Ästhetik in 
Rußland. Die meisten dieser Männer standen unter dem Einfluß 
Hegels, namentlich des linlien Flügels der Junghegelianer und 
dann unter demjenigen Ludwig Peuerbachs. Ihre geistige 
Herkunft ähnelte also derjenigen von Karl Marx und Friedrich 

Es gab aber auch einen rechten Flügel der Hegelianer in 


- 5 

Hußland, der slawophil und antiwestlich war und das in Ruß- 
land Bestehende als im Hegeischen Sinne "vernünftig-' ansah, 
l^ie Angehörigen dieses rechten Flügels hielten den Westen für 
*'morsch" und die I?ussen für Nachfolger in der ?/eltherrschaf t 
und Begründer einer neuen Weltkultur, Zu ihnen gehörte der 
Geschichtsphilosoph Nikolai Lanilewsky (1822^1885), der als 
Vorläufer Oswald Spenglers gelten kann. Er sah nämlich die 
Y/eltgeschichte nicht als gradlinig und evolutionär an, sondern 
als eine Reihe von zyklischen Crescbehen. In seinem Buch 
^'Rußland und Europa" (1869) behauptet er, daß es 12 Zyklen von 
Zivilisationen gegeben hat, die in Aufbau .und Struktur 
verschiedenartig waren. Von einer Zivilisation zur folgenden 
wird wohl die Leistung, aber nicht die Lebensart übertragen. 
Sie wachsen langsam, blühen kurz und sterben. Die romanisch- 

germanische Zivilisation hatte ihre künstlerische Blüte 


1700, die wissenschaftliche im 19. Jahrhundert, wird aber von 
Rußland ersetzt werden. Spengler hat die Grenzen zwischen 
seinen sechs Zivilisationen schärfer getrennt als Banilewsky. 

V/ie die russische Philosophie als Kind der deutschen betrachtet 
werden kann, so dürfte auch das Konzept der sogenainten 
Morschheit der westlichen Kultur der deutschen Bcgriffswelt 
entnommen und zu russischem Gebrauch angepaßt worden sein, 
hielt doch bereits Pichte in den "Roden an die deutsche 
Nation- die deutsche Kultur für ursprünglicher als die des 
V/estens. Er meinte auch, daß Beutschsein und Charakterhaben 
ohne Zweifel gleichbedeutend sei. Solche Ansichten beruhen 

- 6 - 

freilich auf uralton VorurtGilcn. 

iLuropäiöchG Statur erroichtcn solche ruesischo DcnlvGr wie 
Nikolai Fjodorow ( 1 828-1 9o3), der über aeschlechtlichkeit 
philosophierende V/assili Rosanov; (1856-1919), der riiystiker 
Wladimir Solowjow ( 1 853--1 9oo) , auch llikolai Berdiajew (1874- ". 
1948), der ursprünglich .larxist war, sich dann als christlicher 
Existentialist und Spritualist bezeichnete und mit etwa 100 
andern bürgefL ichen Philosophen nach dem Sieg der kommunisti- 
schen Revolution in die Emigration ging wie so viele Russen 
vor ihnen. Aber weder diese bürgerlichen Philosophen nochdie 
konservativen Glawophilen haben einen Einfluß auf die russi- 
sche Oegenwartsphilosophie goY^lnnen können, sondern die revolu- 
tionären Demokraten aus der Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts und 
dann die Anhänger von Karl Marx. 

Es ist nun für die russische L'cnir.veise überaus bezeichnend, 

daß zuerst gerade die materialistische Anthropologie Ludwig 

Feuerbachs und späterhin eine andere Form dos Materialismus 


- nämlich d er Marxismus - in Rußland einen solchen Einfluß 
erlangen konnte. Es war dies gewissermaßen der Radikalismus 
der Verneinung der russischen Gegenwart. In anderen slawi- 
schen Ländern, z.B. in Polen, gestaltete ach die Hegeische 
Philosophie nämlich nicht in M:atcrialismus , sondern in einen 
theistischen, spiritualistischen Messianismus um. 

'Dqj Marxismus griff um sich in Rußland in den neunziger Jahren 
dos 19« Jahrhunderts und gewann dort (freilich nicht auf den 



7 - 

Lehrstühlen der Philosophie, so]!:idern unter freien Schrift- 
stellern) mehr Theoretiker als in irgendeinem europäischen 
Land ~ vielleicht mit Ausnahme Leutschlands . Aber sein 
ochicksal gestaltete sich in Eußland ganz anders. In Deutsch- 
land entstanden etwa auch innerhalb der sozialdemokratischen 
Partei^ die ein marxistisches Programm aufstellte, Bewegungen, 
die ein Abrücken von der ursprünglichen Ideologie des dialek- 
tischen Materialismus von Marx und 'i^ngels kennzeichneten. Lies 
geschah nach dem Tode von Priedrich ingels (l82o-1895), der um 
zwei Jahre jünger war als Karl Marx (1818-1883) und ihn um 
12 Jahre überlebte. Sozialdemokratische Parteimitglieder me 
Eduard Bernstein wurd.m Neukantianer, wahrend neukantianische 
Philosophen wie Hermann Cohen und Karl Vorländer der sozial- 
demokratischen Partei beitraten. In Öst-3rreich näherte sich 
Friedrich Adler dum Positivismus und ^Empiriokritizismus von 
Mach und Avenarius und man behauptete damals in sozialisti- 
schen Kreisen, dai3 jiduard Mach für die Naturwissenschaften 
dasselbe geleistet habe wie Karl Marx für die Sozialwissen- 
schaften. Andere Sozialdemokraten wie Sicgrid Marck, der 
während des Nationalsozialismus nach Amerika auswanderte, 
wurden Neuhegelianer, und ^in anderer sozialistischer 
Theoretiker, Karl Kautsk;/ (der böhmischen Ursprungs war) 
behauptete, es sei für die Befreiung des Proletariats gleich- 
gültig, wie sie philosophisch begründet w^rde - materialistisch 
kantisch oder christlich. Er betrachtete das Meson des 
Marxismus nicht als Philosophie, sondern als Sozialtheorie. 

- 8 


Zu den ersten Theoretikern des i;Iarxismus in Rußland gehörte 
G, Plechanov^ (1856-1918). In~demBueh "In Sachen einer 
monistischen Geschichtsauffassung'' trat er 1895 sowohl gegen 
äen Idealismus als auch den Positivismus, die damals in 
Hußland einflußreich waren, auf. Im Jahre 19o8 erschien sein 
Buch "Die fundamentalen Prägen des Marxismus'', dessen Lehre 
er aber weder in seiner Gänze noch in seiner Reinheit auf- 
rechterhielt, sondern wesensfremde I.Iotive in ihn einführte. 
Auf der V/ende des 19. und 2o. Jahrhunderts machten sich auch 
unter den russischen Sozialdemokraten ähnliche Bewegungen 

bemerkbar wie unter den deutschen. Sic brachen mit de 


Laterialismus von Earx, um ihn dui^ch den Positivismus zu 
ersetzen. Piese Rechtung vertrat AoA. Bogdanow (geboren 1873), 
der in den Jahren 19o4-7 zu den Pührern der bolschewikischen 
Fraktion (d.h. der IViehrheit srichtung) der russischen Sozial- 
demokraten gehörte. (Bis 19o5, d.h. bis zur ersten russischen 
Revolution, waren politische Parteien in Rußland überhaupt 
verboten). Er nannte seine Richtung, die eine Abwandlung 
der jenige n von Mach und Avenarius war, Empiriomonisraus . Er 
warf dem Marxismus vor, daß er Merkmale Hegels beibehielte 
und daher Lletaphr/sik bliebe. Er ging zu eirsr sub je ktivisti- 
schen, dem eigentlichen Marxismus völlig fremden Richtung 
über und hatt^ nicht eine "dialektische,/", wie die Marxisten, 
sondern eine ''mechanistische" Auffassung von der Natur, die 
nach seiner Ansicht dem damalige n Stand der Naturwissenschaft 
besser entsprach. Er hatte viele Anhänger, wie den späteren 
ersten russischen Volkskommissar für Volksauf klärung nach 

^ 9 

der Oktoberrevolution von 1917, den Ästhetiker und Kritiker 
Anatol LunatGcharsky , forner BaGaro\i, Juschkcvyitsch und 
andere, mit denen er 19o4-9 eine .Reihe von Büchern veröffent- 

Hier griff nun Lenin (v71adimir Iljitsch Uljanow, 187o~1924) 
ein, ein sozialistischer Schriftsteller, der seine literari. 

sehe Tätigkeit bereits 1894, also noch vor dem Tode vo 


Engels, begonnen hatte und in sozialistischen Kreisen (nicht 
aber außerhalb derselben) sehr gut bekannt war. Lenin war 
besorgt, daß die geschilderte Aufweichung des Marxismus 
dessen revolutionäre Brisanz bedrohte. Sr richtete nun 
seinen Hauptangriff g^jgen Bogdanow, aber auch gegen ähnliche 
modische Abweichung'on vom integralen Marxismus, gegen die 
Lehren von Mach und Avenarius im Buche ^'Materialismus und 
Empiriokritizismus" (l9oG). Lenin spürte den idealistischen 
Elementen im Positivismus, Empirismus, in der Naturwissen- 
schaft usw. nach und bekämpfte sie mit beispielloser polemi- 
scher Heftigkeit. Idealismus war nämlich für ihn gleich- 
bedeutend mit "Pfaffentum% er sah in ihm also die Gefahr 
eines Rückfalls in den ''Eideismus" und der Unterminierung 
des historischen Materialismus von Karl Marx. Denn dieser 
beruht Ja auf dem Grundsatz, daß Sein vor Lenl^en geht, 
nie- ht umgekehrt, was sozialgeschichtlich so viel bedeutet, 
daß die Grundlage der geschichtlichen Entwicklung die realen 
Produktionsverhältnisse sind, nicht etwa die Gedanken, die 
wir uns über die Gesellschaft machen. Es gilt also der 
'^Primat der Realität. Die Gedanken, die sich die Menschen 


~ 1o - 

darüber bilden, sind dor ideologische Überbau. Die philosophi- 
sche Grundlage dieses Standpunktes ist der philosophische 
Materialismus, der die i.;aterie ~ und nicht den Geiet - als da'i 
V/esen der Welt ansieht und daher auch folgerichtig behaupten 
muß, daß \yir imstande sind, das Wesen der Welt zu erkennen. 
Dies ist der erkenntnistbooretJs che Realismus, der in der 
Marxschen Lehre und bei Lenin mit dem l.Iaterialismus verschmol- 
zen erscheint. Die ,/elt ist also darnach nicht ein bloßes 
Schattenspiel unserer '^Vorstellungen'' wie der ''Idealismus-' 
behauptet. Man muß hier betonen, daß dieser ^'Idealismus'' 
keinerlei sittliche Bedeutung hat, es handelt sich hier 
lediglich um die Art und die Grenzen unserer Erkenntnis, 
nicht um Gesinnun^^ n. 

Lenins Liatriben gegen äcn ^'Idealismus'' wurden zum Vorbild 
der Angriffe der späteren Philosophen in der Sowjetunion gegen 
die westliche Philosophie des 2o. Jahrhunderts, die so 

anachronistisch wirken, weil sie von der Versteinerung de 


Denkens auf einer Stufe zeugen, die um I900 aktuell war, jetzt 
aber mehr wie ein Kampf ßegon Windmühlen aussieht, weil der 
Streit, hie Materialismus - hie Idealismus - nicht mehr im 
Mittelpunkt philosophischer Diskussion steht. 

Lenin veröffentlichte außer der erwähnten Schrift noch 
''Drei viuellen und drei Bestandteile des Marxismus'', ferner 

i - 

''Die historischen Schicksale der Lehre von Earl Marx". Nach 
seinem Tode wurden seine ''Philosophischen Hefte" 

- 11 - 

(Pilossofökijo Tjetrady) I929/30 und' 1933 voröff entlieht. 
Im allgemGinen hat Lenin die erkcnntnisthcoreti eichen und 
methodologischen Grundlagen des Marxismus cntv^ickelt, ihn 
nicht nur vom philosophischen Idealismus d,h. in der Tat vom 
erkenntnistheoretischen Nihilismus und Skeptizismus abgegrenzt, 
sondern überhaupt von allen Serien Theorien, die wie die Lehre •. 
Kants oder der Positivismus idealistische oder skeptische 
Elemente zu enthalten schjenen; schließlich griff er auch den 
mechanistischen Materialismus an, weil .r keine Handhabe für 
die Erklärung der historischen Entwicklung, für die Gesetze 
des V/andels bot. Diese Grundlagen waren in der ''Dialektik'' 

Stalin äußerte sich über Lenin f olgendermaßens 
Zitatspro s ^'Ich glaube, Lenin fügte zum l.arxismus keine neuen Grundsätze 

hin^u, genauso wie er auch keinen alten Grundsatz änderte. 
Er ist der konsequenteste Schüler von Marx und Engels o.. 'Aber 
er war nicht nur ein Vollstrecker der Lehre von Marx-Engels, 
sondern gleichzeitig ihr Portsetzer ... er entwickelte sie 
weiter .. und .paßte sid den neuen Entwicklungsbedingungen 
an ... nämlich der Phase des Imperialismus ... Er trug zu ihr 
etwas bei im Vergleich mit dem, was in der vorimperialistischen 
Periode des Kapitalismus gegeben sein konnte. 
Sprechers Hier spielt Stalin auf die Tatsache an, daß Lenin das 

Zeitalter des ersten Weltkriegs als die Verfallsperiode des 
Kapitalismus, als die Periode imperialistischer Kriege 
auffaßte und dadurch auch alle kriegsführenden Staaten dos 

~ 12 - 

Zitatspr • 

Westens zusammGii mit r-outschland als imperialistisch in einen 

l'opf warlj was für die Bourteilun^^ der Kriegsschuldfrage vo 


V/ichtigkeit vjar, Stalin meint weiter, daß das Neue, das Lenin 
zur Schatzkammer des iuarxismus beitrug, voll und ganz auf den 
(Grundsätzen von Marx und Engels beruhte. 

'•'In diesem Sinne spricht man bei un^ (d.h. in Rußland) vom 
Leninismus als Marxismus in der Epoche des Imperialismus und der 
proletarischen Revolutionen. '' • 

Sprecher." Stalin (Josif V/issarionowitsch Lschugaschwili , 1879-1953) war 

um neun Jahre jünger als Lenin. Er trat 1913 mit einem Aufsatz 
"Marxismus und nationale Frage >* auf den Plan, der Lenins 

Beifall erntete. In diesem lieferte er eine in Sowjetrußland 
berühmte Definition des Begriffs "'Nation^': 

Zitatspr.;; Eine Nation ist eine historisch gewachsene stabile G-emein- 

schaft von Menschen, entstanden auf der Grundlage der 
Gemeinschaft der Sprache, des Territoriums, des Wirtschaft 


lebens und der sich in der Gemeinschaft der Kultur offen- 
barenden ps.ychischon Wesensart. 

Sprecher« Diese Definition war wichtig mit Rücksicht auf den Nationali- 
tätencharakter des russischen Reiches, das in den Sowjetstaat 
umgebildet wurde. Stalins letztes 'York behandelte die Theorie 
der Sprache 5 er führte aus, daß die Sprache als allgemeines 
Verständigungsmittel keineswegs ein Teil des ideologischen 
Überbaus sei. Die einzelnen Sprachen seien also im. Kommunisti- 
schen Staat existenzbere.chtigt. Seine wichtigste Schrift 

- 13 - 


Über dialektischen und historischen Llaterialismus '* faßt 

Zitatspr . 

lapidar dessen G-rundsätze zusammen^ insbesondere diejenigen 
der Dialektik, wie sie Engels ausgearbeitet hatte ^ obwohl die 
Grundlagen auf Hegel zurückgehen, der in seiner ''Logik'* ^ • 
unter anderem behauptet, alle Dinge seien an sich widersprüch- 
lich. Marx kam es hauptsächlich auf die -/idersprüche in der 
Gesellschaft, Engels auch um //idersprüche in der Natur an. 
Lenin rezipierte die Lehren beider. Stalin erklärt weiters 

''Die dialektische Methode betrachtete^den Prozeß der 
Entwicklung vom Niedrigeren zum Höheren nicht als eine harmo- 
nisde Entfaltung •.. sondern als eine Enthüllung der v/ider~ 
sprüche in I)±nßon und Erscheinungen, als einen ''Kampf'' 
entgegengesetzter Tendenzen, die auf der Grundlage dieser 
V/idersprüche wirksam sind.'' 


Diese Ansichten wirken ''revolutionär", \icn.n man sie auf 
gesellschaftliche Entwicklung anwendet ^ auf die Biologie 
gezielt, enthalten sie Elemente des Darwinismus, auf die Natur 
gemünzt ist es eine fragwürdige philosophische Interpretation 
ph.Ysikalis eher Erscheinungen. - Nach Stalin bestand das 
Verdienst Lenins darin, daß er die Errungenschaften der 
Wissenschaft von der Zeit Engels' bis zu seiner eigenen auf 
dem Gebiete der materialistischen Philosophie verallgemeinert 
und die antimaterialistischen Strömungen unter den Marxisten 
vornehmlich in seinem Buche ^'Materialismus und Empiriokriti- 
zismus'' einer allseitigen Kritik unterzogen hat. Schon Engels 
habe behauptet, daß "der Materialismus nach jeder m ixon 

- 14 

großen Entdeckung eine neue GoGtalt annehmen müssco" 

Noch zu Lebzeiten Lenins , aber erst recht nach seinem Tode, 
sind manche russische Marxisten vom reinen LIarxismus-Leninismus 
abgewichen. Die einen neigtun zum "mechanistischen'' (nicht 
dialektischen) riaterialismus wie N.J. Bucharin (geb. 1888), 
die anderen wie A.M. Leborin (geb. 18S1) neigten zum 
dialektischen Idealismus. Liese Abweichungen verurteilte 
Stalin, so daß seit etwa 1931 die Philosophie des dialektischen 
Materialismus nach Llarx^-Engels-Lenin alleinherrschend wurde. 
Dies war wohl das V/crk Stalins, doch änderte sich hierin 
nichts Wesentliches auch nach seinem Tode, obwohl die 
Stellungnahme zu gewissen wissenschaftlichen Disziplinen 
einer gewissen V/andlung unterlag. 

Betrachtet man nun das .^erk von Lenin und Stalin und dasjenige 
der übrigen russischen Kommentatoren, Glossatoren und Kompi- 
latoren, die alle mit Lenin und Stalin beteuern, daß sie (treu 
den ''Klassikern'' Marx und Engels) die Philosophie behandelt 
haben, so ergibt sich ein höchst merl-cwürdiges Bild, wenn man 
das Ergebnis ihrer Arbeit mit dem Urbild der ''Klassiker'' 
vergleicht. Es ist, als ob man in den Zügen eines fünfjährigen 

Kindes nach den Ähnlichkeiten mit einem erwachsenen Mann 
oder in dessen Zügen nach den Ähnlichkeitn mit einem Greis 
suchen würde. Es wurde hier so viel ausgestaltet, ergänzt, 
daß man den Kern aus diesem Gestrüpp herausklauben muß. Die 
hauptsächlichen Lehren von Karl Marx - sein historischer 
Materialismus - ist im ''Kapital'' und in der Vorrede 



"Zur Kritik der politit cl-^en Oekonomi; •■' enthalten . l'ies ist 
■■•ine Analyse der ökonomischen Sr:i;uk.';ur d.r vorkapitali-titcben 
und dei kapitalietiechen Gesellschaft. lieet man denn dort 
etwas von solchen dialektischen ''Gesetz .n- wie dem Umschlagen 
öer ^iuantitett in Qualität oder von der ;^:;gation der N-<=-ation 
und anderen im Grunde metaphysischen Segriffen di>;:-ser Arf^ 
]3i.,c; zog Engels aus Hegel, krempelte si;; materialistisc': um 
und behandelt., ei. im ■'A.-.ti-Duhr ing-, ferner in Auslassungen, 
die zu seinen .eebzeiten gar nicht erschi. nen sind, sondern erst 
von den Sowjetgele hxt.n nach der ' Oktoberrevolution von 1917 
,ale "Dialektik dei Natur" herausgegeben vmiden, genauso wie 
&:j umfangreiche Jfachlaß von Karl Ilarx. Dies mag philologisch 
verdienstlich und für die Entwicklung' von i.arx selbst inter- 

essant sein, aber offenbar hat Llarx nicht alle G. danken, di 


--J in seiner Jugend hegte, später beibehalten.Ähn lieh wurde 
aus vereinzelten Äußerungen, bri fliehen Bemerkungen der 
"Klassiker des Larxismus" eine ausgewachsene ästhetische Theo- 
rie zusammengetragen. Eine gewisse Akzentverschiebung im 
i.arxismus vollzog noch Lenin, als .er im ■■. "aterialismus und 
-Empiriokritizismus- das Hauptgewicht auf die Erkenntnietheorie 
verlegte. Seine i'otive waren politischer i^'atur , denn er war 
kein politisierender Philosoph, sondern ein philosophierender 
Politiker. Und ein gleiches gilt noch in viel höherem 'laße von 
..talin. Es mag schon richtig sein, was unlängst Henry L. 
.Roberts, der Direktor des "Institute of. East Central Europe^' 
an der Columbia Universität in New York behauptete: Lenin 
scheine ein. ^g^lj seltenen historischen Gestalten zu sein, 

16 - 

auf öl., man wie auf TTapolcon unc Bi-raaick immer wieder zurüol 

komme und die man immer \vieder untereucbe. Aber ölnF. ist 
offenbar seiner politischen, nicht s :iner Polle als philoso- 
phischv.! Theoretiker zuzuschreiben. i}i^s durfte in ne-ch viel 
höherem Llaße auf Stalin zutreffen. 

b-eradc wegen der politischen Stellung von Lenin und Stalin 
bietet die Sowjetunion ein einzigartiges ßchauspiel in der 
Geschichte der Philosophie.^ das einer Personalunion zwischen 
der philosophischen und der politischen Führung des Landes« 
L^nin war der Er neuerer des Marxismus und Stalin dessen 
maFJgeblicher S.ynoptikej. Lies hatte wichtig., Folgen! einer-- 
seits wurde die Stellung der Philosophie in Pußland viel 
einflußreicher als in anderen Ländern, andererseits bekam die 
Philosophie dadurch ein parteimäßiges, politisches, also 
einseitiges Gesicht, dies schon dadurch, daß Lenin den Grund- 
satz der "Parteilichkeit" für die Philosophie aufstellte, 
Nur indem sie parteilich ist, kann sie ihm zufolge richtig 
sein, nämlich dann, wenn sie den Standpunkt der Arbeiterklasse 
zum ihrigen macht. Unparteilichkeit ist nicht nur eine 

bürgerliche Idee, sond-rn praktisch undurchführbar, weil all 
im G..wande der Unparteilichkeit ihre eigenen Interessen 
verfolgen. Lemgegenüber erstrebten die meisten Philosophen 
ddr Vergangenheit eine objoktive Philosophie. 


Wie bereits bemerkt, hat Lenin die Erkenntnistheorie z 
tragenden Pfeiler des riarxismus-leninismus gemacht, 


- 17 - 

doGSon arund thoso besteht in düi Annahme, daß die .^.^it wirklich 
und real ict^ daß sie nicht ein Gebilde unserer Vorstellungen 
ist wie etwa 3ehopenhauer und andere ''Idealisten'* annahmen, 
lur dio die Welt nnr*'ideal% nicht ''real-' vor banden war . Laß 

Sein vor Denic.^n geht, hat noch Liarx in der Umk.hrung von 
Hegels Weltansicht dargetan, I3ie z--eite richiübri^ens auG der 
ersten ergebenden These ist die weitere Behauptung, daß 


Qiese .Wirklichkeit ^jrkennen können. Wir wissen nicht nur, daß 
die v^elt e:..istiert, abur wir wiesen auch, wi., sie beschaffen 
ist. Sie ist kein unerkennbares 'i)±ng an sich. Es gibt also in 
dieser Philosophie kein verschleiertes Bild zu Sais. Die Welt 
ist nicht ein Denkgebilde, sondern das Denken ein Produkt der 
Welt. Die Sinne vermittc;ln die Welterkenntnis. Diese 
Erkenntnis ist zwar möglich und wirklich, aber nicht vollkommen, 
sie entwickelt sich im Zuge des wissenschaftlichen Fortschritts. 
Es muß hier hervorgehoben werden, daß die Errungenschaften der 
Raumschiffahrt, die Leistungen der Astronauten die russischen 
Philosophen in ihrer 'Überzeugung von der Erkennbarkeit der 
Natur bestärkt haben. Hier wurde ein praktischer Beweis 
erbracht, daß die Gesetze der Astronomie und der Physik richtig 
seien. Der Trugschluß der idealistischen Philosophen besteht 
darin, daß sie unsere Sinne nicht als uine Pforte zur 
Erkenntnis d^r ielt betrachten, sondurn als eine Scheidewand, 
die uns von der Welt trennt. Lies würde jeder Erblindete oder 
Taubgewordene wissen, nur nicht die idealistischen Philosophen. 

Die Wirklichkeit, der Mensch sind körperlich, ober diese 

- 18 - 

Körperlichkeit hat viele Entwicklungsgrade und erreicht im 
Gehiinapparat die Eigenschaft des Bewußtseins, Auf dieser 
Stufe erlangt die I.iaterie die Fähigkeit, die -Zelt zu wider- 
spiegeln. Dies ist eine natürliche und zugleich wissenschaft- 
liche v./eltanschauung im Cxcgensatz zum Idealismus, der weder 
das eine noch das andere ist^ sondern dank den animistischen 
Tendenzen der Religion entstanden ist. Er ist auch sozial mit 
der Reaktion verbunden, er dient der herrschenden Klasse , 
indem er die Aufmerksamkeit der liassen von wirklichen realen 
Aufgaben ablenkt, um sie auf ''ideale-' Inhalte zu richten. 
Dies ist demnach eine weitere Ausdeutung des Leninschen 
Ausspruchs '^Idealismus ist Piaff entum '• 

Ein Grundsatz der Dialektik in der Stalinschen Formulieiung 
lautet dahin, daß alle Erscheinungen einanderjbe dingen und daß 
es in der Natur keine . isolierten Gegenstände gibt. Vielmebr 
berühren sie sich in v.^echselwirkung. Es gibt auch keinen 
Ruhezustand in der Welt, sondern standigen /echsel. Die Dinge 
entwickeln sich und sterben ab, ITeues löst das Alte ab. Die 
dialektische Methode sieht die Dinge in andauernder 
Entwicklung, und zwar so, daß die Naturerscheinungen zunächst 
kleine, unansehnliche V/andlungen durchmachen, die immer 
größer und wesentlicher werden, um dann plötzlich von solchen 
bloß quantitativen in qualitative, wesentliche Unterschiede 
umzuschlagen. Dies sind jähe Sprünge von einem Zustand in 
den anderen. Dieses Prinzip des Umschlagens von Quantität in 
Qualität, das den ganzen Entwicklungsvorgang erklären soll, " 

- 19 - 

wurde von Hegel aufgestellt, von Friedrich ::ngel? übernommen 
und bildet eine der vvichtigsten Säulen der Lialektik nach 
Stalin. Einen derartigen dialektischen Sprung bildet der 
Übergang von der anorganischen zur organischen Natur, vom Tiere 
zum r.ienschen, von dem unbewußten Zustand zur Bewußtheit usw. 
Die Dialektik ist eine Philosophie der Diskontinuität, sie 
laßt die Bewegung stets neue Qualitäten schaffen und zu einer 
immer höheren btufe fortschreiten. Den Sprüngen in der TTatur 
entsprechen die Revolutionen in der gesellschaftlichen 
Entwicklung. Auf diese kommt es natürlich dem dialektischen 
Materialismus hauptsächlich an, wobei die Natur gewissermaßen 
das vorexerziert, was die Gesellschaft dann auf ihre Weise 
vollzieht. Dies sind natürlich Interpretationen der v7irklich- 
keit, nicht deren G-esetze. 

v7ir haben gehört, daß die Natur ''Widersprüche*'' enthält. D 


aber der "Widerspruch^' ein logischer Begriff ist, so könne 


V/idersprüche eher zwischen Begriffen oder zwischen Aussagen, 
aber nicht zwischen existierenden Dingen bestehen. Da Hegel 
Denken und Sein zu einer Einheit verschmolz, sprach er von 
'^Widersprüchen"'^ wo modernere Ansichten von "Gegensätzen*' 
sprechen. Solche G-egensätze, sollen zufolge der Dialektik 
schon deswegen bestehen, weil die Entwicklung immer neue 
Gestaltungen zeitigt, die untereinander im Kampf liegen. 
Es besteht also ein Kampf zwischen dem Absterbenden und 
Neuen. Er bildet die Triebkraft der Natur, den Inhalt der 
Entwicklung. Die dialektische Hethode erblickt in der Natur 

- 2 - 

nicht etwa Harmonie, r:ondern Kampf als den ursprünglichen 
Zustand. Die Einheit der Gegensätze, sagt Lenin, ist bedingt, 
zeitweilig, vergänglich, relativ, ihr Kampf ist absolut wie 
die Bewegung und die Entwicklung« Alle Anpassungen sind also 
sekundäre Erscheinungen, Einlieit ist zeitweilig, Kampf ewig. 

V/as Friedrich Engels in Eorm von ■'V/idersprüchen'- in der Natur 
entdeckte, fand Larx ebenfalls in der G-esellschaf t und in der 
sozialen Struktur. Es ist einsichtig, daß solche Anschauungen 
Lenins praktisches Vorgehen beeinflussen mußten. - Jede 
Erscheinung unterliegt im Kampf der Gegensätze, sie wird früher 
oder später ''negiert'', aber diese Negation wird dann ebenfalls 
^'negiert'', wer auf eine Art Piückkehr zum Früheren erfolgt, aber 
nicht auf gleicher, sondern auf höherer Stufe. Lies ist die 
sogenannte ''Negation der Negation*, eine Verallgemeinerung, 
die Engels ebenfalls der Hegeischen Philosophie entnommen und 
sie in ein allgemein gültiges, materielles Naturgesetz 
umgeformt hat. Lie Entwicklung-, erklärt Lenin, wiederholt die 

durchmachten Stufen 

aber auf einer höheren Ebene, sie hat 

sozusagen die Gestalt einer Spirale, nicht einer Geraden. Sie 
erfolgt auch in Sprüngen, es gibt also gewissermaßen kata- 
strophenartige Unterbrechungen der Kontinuität, revolutionäre 
Konvulsionen, das Umschlagen der .uanität in die .Qualität; 
es gibt innere Entwicklungsimpulse ^ die sich aus den 
Widersprüchen ergeben, aus dem Zusammenprall der unterschied- 
lichen Kräfte und Tendenzen, welche in den Erscheinungen oder 
in der Gesellschaft wirken. Diese Dialektik der Weltbewegung 

'- ?. ^ - 

setzte Lenin nicht nur der üblichen Sntvvicklung'slehre 
entgegen, sondern auch der alten Metaphysik, die ein absolutes, 
unveränderliches Sein annahm. Daher begründete Stalin ein 
neues Gegensatzpaar ^ hie Dialektik, . hie netaphysik , was 
insofern wiederum verwirrend ist, weil es ja genauso wie 
eine des Seins auch seit Heraklit eine solche des 
Werdens gegeben hat. 

Die Sntwicklun^'sprinzipien der Dialektik sind sehr weitmaschig 
und die Nachfolger Lenins und Stalins versuchten in diesem 
Rahmen auch verschiedene Peststollungen der modernen quanten- 
physikalischen Forschung unterzubringen, sie als ''Beweis'' der 
PLichtigkeit der Dialektik hinzustellen, also die Gültigkeit 
dieser dialektischen Logik, der Logik der Entwicklung nachzu- 
weisen. Da Lenin den unzerreißbaren Zusammenliang der 
Erscheinungen betonte, namentlich die Tatsache, daß der Prozeß 
der v7eltbewegung strikten Gesetzen unterworfen ist, halten 
die marxistischen Philosophen an dem Kausalitätsgesetz fest 
gegenüber den Anfechtungen, denen es aus den Kreisen moderner 

.ysiker ausgesetzt wurde. Sie schließen sich also Louis de 
Broglie an, der die Geltung dieses Gesetzes verteidigt. Und 
wenn die Naturgesetze von skeptischen Gelehrten als subjektiv 
und konventionell ''entlarvt"' wurdei^, behaupten die marxisti- 
schen Philosophen in Rußland getreu den Überlieferungen Lenins 
die Objektivität der Naturgesetze. Sie sagen, daß die bloße 
Deskription oder Beschreibung der Erscheinungen nicht genüge 5 
die Wissenschaft brauche auch .Erklärung und diese gibt es 

22 - 

nicht ohno Gesetzmäßigkeiten* Lies sind Iconservativ-tradltionel. 
le Züge dieser dialektischen Philosophie. 

Im Gegensatz zum mechanistischen riatei ialismus behauptet der 
dialektische, daß bloß quantitative Unterschiede die vielen 
ü^ormen der v/irklichkeit nicht zu erklären vermögen. Sie sind 
ohne Berücksichtigung der qualitativen Unterschiede nicht 
genügend. In kosmologischer Hinsicht ist zwar die Natur 
materiell j aber sie steigt von otufo zu Stufe immer höher 
aulj vom toten Stoff zum Lebendigen und Bewußten. Alle diese 
Stufen unterliegen allgemeinen Gesetzen^ und jede Stufe hat 
überdies ihre besonderen Gesetze. Dies betrifft auch die 
Gesellschaft, die wirtechaf tlichen Gesetzmäßigkeiten unter- 
liegt, welche ebenfalls 'dialektisch sind, so daß sich die 
Gesellschaft zwischen •/andlungen und Umstürzen zu immer 
höheren Formen aufschwingt. Pviese Auffassung ist von derjeni- 
gen grundverschieden, die behauptet, daß die Geschichts- 
wissenschaft überhaupt keine Gesetze kennt, sondern höchstens 
die Geschichtswandlungen "verstehen'' kann. Dies bestreitet 
der dialektische Materialismus, der das Vorhandensein von 
solchen ''Geisteswissenschaften-' wie sie ./indelband und 
Pickert postuliert haben, nicht anerkennt. 

Um wahr zu sein, muß also die Philosophie dialektisch sein, 
ferner, obwohl sie materialistisch ist^ lehnt sie den alten, 


mechanistischen" iriaterialismus deswe/'^en ab, weil er 

urJiistorJs ch war und die Vielfalt der Erscheinungen der 
V/irklichkeit und deren besondere Gesetze vernachlässigte. 

- 2'j 

^1. sah auch den r'^enechen ''abstrakt-' als unveränderliches 
i/esen, nicht konkret als gesellschaftliches' Produkt , als im 
Zuge der sozialen Entwicklung wandelbar. Auf dem dialekti-- 
sehen Materialismus beruht als Theorie der Gesellschaft und 
ihrer ^Entwicklung der ''historische fiater ialismus '■' , den 
kompilatorisch ein nach dem Tode Stalins (1955) you der 
Akademie der V/issens ehalten der Sovv je tunion herausgegebenes 
Werk ''Historischer Laterialismus"' ( Istor itscheski j materialism) 
schildert. Hier erklärt der Redaktor I.V, Konstantinow , daß 
der historische I-aterialismus eirE vollkommene wohlbegründete 


issenschaftliche Theorie sei, die die Entwicklung der 

Gesellschaft, den Übergang von einer sozialen Formation zur 
anderen, erkläre. Er bezieht sich da auf Stalins 
"Oekonomische Probleme des Sozialismus in der Sowjetunion" 
aus dem Jahre 1952, wo es heißt, daß die verschiedenen sozia- 
len Formationen in ihrer ökonomischen Entwicklung einerseits 
durch die spezifischen Gesetze einer jeden einzelnen Forma- 
tion, aber auch durch die allgemei n3n Gesetze regiert werden, 
die für alle Formationen gültig sind. Siu sind demnach durch 
die spezifischen Gesetze voneinander getrennt, aber durch die 
allgemeinen Gesetze miteinander verbunden. E'onstantinow zählt 
folgende soziologische "Gesetze" aul, die auf allen Stufen 

gesellschaftlicher Entwicklung gelten: das Gesetz der 

- « 

bestimmenden Holle der gesellschaftlichen Seins im Verhältnis 
zum gesellschaftlichen Bewußtsein, d.h. maßgebend sind die 
Produktionsverhältnisse, die gesellschaftliche Struktur 
selbst j nicht die Gedanken, die sich die Menschen darüber 

- 24 - 

bildsn; weiterhin das Gesetz, daß die Produktivv^rhältnisse 
von der Entwicklungsstufe der Produktivkräf 'e abhängen; dies 
bedeutet, daß die Struktur der Ges^^-llschaf t von den 
Produktions formen abhängt, z.B. daß der Kapitalismus im 
Maschinenzoitalter entsteht: ferner gilt das Gesetz, daß 
die ökonomische Grundlage den sozialen überbau, d.h. die 
geistigen Strömungen eines Zeitalters determiniert, schließ- 
lieh das Gesetz der sozialen T?.evolutionen im Zug des Übergangs 


von einer sozial-Ökonomischen £jtruktur zur anderen. Mes sin3 
die bereits erwähnten Entwicklungs.-'sprünge % die an die 
geologischen Katastrophen von Cuvior erinnern. Es gibt aber 
nach Konstantinow noch andere '''Ck^setze '' dieser Art. Es 
handelt sich aber hier offenbar um Hypothesen, die er zu 
G-esetzen stempelt. 


Es ist interessant, wie der erwähnte Eedor V. Konstantinow 
sich zu der sittlichen Grundfrage der menschlichen Freiheit 
stellt. Er erklärt in einem Aufsatz •'Der Mensch und die 
Gesellschaft'' (1963) i 

... Die Freiheit ist ein geschichtliches Produkt, das sich in 
einem bestimmten Augenblick der Entwicklung der Gesellschaft 
einstellt. Deswegen ist die Freiheit der Persönlichkeit nicht 
nur aufs engste mit der Freiheil: der Gesellschaft verbunden, 
sie existiert nur nach Maßgabe der Entwicklung der Freiheit 
der Gesellschaft ... Es wird gesagt, der Ursprung aller 
unserer Schwierigkeiten liege in der "dämonischen-' Natur 
des Menschen, seiner Sündhaftigkeit, seiner ursprünglichen 

~ 25 - 

Aggressivität, Andere behaupten, die Tragik beruhe auf dem 
Hückstand des sittlichen hinter dem wissenschaf tlich-^techni- 

schen Fortschritt ... Andere sagen ... die Angst, die Tragik, 
die Vereinsamung, die Verlassenheit des Menschen seien das 
Ergebnis seiner unausweichlichen Verdammnis in dieser Welt. 
Wir gehen von der Voraussetzung aus, "daß die Wurzel aller Übel, 
die Ursache der widerspruchsvollen Lage des Menschen in dur 
sozialen Struktur liegt und im laassenantagonismus begründet 
ist. In einem sozialistischen Staat, in dem dieser 
Antagonismus nicht vorhanden ist, gestalten sich die Beziehungen 
der Person zur Gesellschaft ganz anders.. 

Sprechern Konstantinov verwirft also die Treiheitsbegriff e der 

neothomistischen oder existentialistischen Philosophen wie 
Jacques Karitain oder Karl Jaspers. Kan sieht, daß dL.r 
Rreiheitsbegriff innerhalb der marxii^^tischen Philosophie eine 
ganz andere Bedeutung hat. die Freiheit der Persönlichkeit 
wird hier mit der Freiheit der Gesellschaft identifiziert, 
die im Verschwinden des Klassai antagoriismus gründet. Sie beruht 
daher auf der bewußten i.lanipulation der gesellschaftlichen 
Gesetze und überdies auch auf der Beherrschung der Natur- 
gesetze, die sich im technisch-wissenschaftlichen Portschritt 
äußert. Ganz im Einklang mit solchen Anschauungen äußerteai 
sich zwei marxistische tschechische Philosophen in der 
Pachzeitschrift ''Pilosof ick.y Casopis" (Jahrgang 1961, Heft 4), 
die die tschechoslowakische Akademie, der Wissenschaften in 
Prag publiziert, daß das Eindringen in de^n V/eltraum durch 
die sowjetischen Kosmonauten in der Geschichte der Menschheit 

26 - 

eindn ■'Sprung" aus dorn Tieich der IJot'Äendigkcit in dasjenige 
der Freiheit bodeutc. Dies ist also eine Gattungsfroiheit , 
der gegenüber die persönliche etwas Abgeleitetes bleibt. 
Es ist weder eine Freiheit von der Gesellschaft noch in der 
Gesellschaft, sondern eine solche durch die Gesellschaft. 


lach Konstantine« hat aber die neue ces^llschaf tliche Ordnung 

ungeahnte Schöpferkräfte und Begabun^:en freigesetzt, von denen 

es nach Lenin eine unbegrenzte l,Ien^-;c gibt. Es ist aber' klar 

ersichtlich, daß all dies das persönliche Schicksal der meisten 

Konschen weniger betrifft, als es nach Eonstantinow den 

Anschein hat, weil es diejenigen nicht befriedigt, die ein 

persönliches Leben führen wollen oder dessen lährnisse erleiden 

Mt dem Thema der Freiheit beschäftigt sich A.G. -^sliwtschenko 
(1963) und meint, daß zwar innere Freiheit relativ unabhängig 
sei, aber nicht in Isolierung betrachtet werden könne, weil 
sie durch die Umgebung bedingt sei und nicht erreicht werden 
könne, wenn man alles Äußere , ignoriere ... Der Hauptfehler der 
J^ahlroichen Begriffe der Freiheit im i?esten, z.B. des 
Existentialismus, bestete darin, daß sie den dialektischen 
Charakter des Inneren und Äußeren, des Subjektiven und 
Objektiven mißachte, die Tatsache negiere, daß die Existenz 
und die Freiheit des Individuums durch Gesellschaft und 
Geschichte betroffen werden ... 

Zitatspr.: Die Grundlage freier Wahl ist Wissen. Je besser wir die 

Wirklichkeit kennen, umsomehr Freiheit genießen wir. Freiheit 

- 27 

des >Yill..ns beruht nicht auf Selbstref Icxion und einer 
eingebildeten Freiheit von den Gesetzen der ^Wirklichkeit, 
sondern auf der Fähigkeit, auf Grund von Wissen eine -Zahl zu 
troffen. Sie setzt voraus, daß .man auf Grundjvon '/issen sich 
und die Natur beherrscht. Die Frage einer Übereinstimmung des 
Inneren und Äußeren reduziert sich hauptsächlich auf die 
Frage der Konvergenz der sozialen und persönlichen Interessen. 
Sie kann in einer durch Klassengegensätze zerrissenen Gesell- 
schaft nicht existieren. 

Die Existentialisten vervverfen alle objektiven Kriterien, 
die nach ihnen die "Echtheit" und die individuelle V/ahrhafti 
keit nui-' schädigen ... Ihr Ethos ist derart individualisiert 
und der objektiven Realität entrückt, daß die menschliche 
Existenz nach Nietzsche jenseits von gut und böse ist. Dies 
folgt aus der existentialistischen Auffassung der Freiheit 
als von etwas, das weder durch die menschliche Natur noch 
durch soziale Gesetze begrenzt ist. Deswegen ist in der 




existenzialistischen Philosophie die Ethik zugunsten eine 
absoluten individuellen Freiheit abgeschafft worden ... 
Karl Marx hat trotz persönlichem Elend und Verfolgung eine 
freie Wahl getroffen, er "'wählte sich selbst", aber er sagte 
im Gegensatz zu den ^xistentialistens ..''as ich aus mir mache, 
tue ich für die Gesellschaft, im Bewußtsein dessen, daß ich 
ein soziales V/esen bin. Bereits Hegel sagte, daß der V/ille 
nur als denkender Intellekt frei ist. Er verlachte die 
Philosophen, die sich nur an das Gefühl halten, die Wissen- 
schaft verachten und die Barbarei zum Prinzip erheben. Dies 

- 28 - 


könnten sich die bürgerlichen Philoso.phon zu Herzen nehme n^ 
die zum Subjektivismus und Irrationaliemus herabsinken. 

Diese Vierte könnten insbesondere als dir..kte Antwort an 
Martin Heidegger gelten, der eine mystische ''Logik des 
Herzens'* dem Geist entgegenstellt. Eine der größten 
Errungenschaften der marxistischen Theorie der Freiheit ist 
nach I.iysliVv'tschenko die Konkretisierung., des Problems der 
Freiheit nicht nur als einer theoretischen^ sondern als einer 
praktischen Frage. Freiheit bedeutet nicht nur "'/issen um die 
Liotwendigkeit, sondern die aktive Beteiligung des Menschen 

an der Verv^irklichur^; jener Möglichkeiten, die die Notwendig- 
keit bietet, d.h. derjenigen, die in der '.Wirklichkeit enthal- 
ten sind. Die Freiheit enthält mit anderen ./orten die 
Möglichkeit eines "ahlvollzuges. 

Die Möglichkeit eines .Vahlvollzuges , von dem hier 
Mvslivy/tschenko spricht, ließe sich z.B, f olgenderweiso 
erläutern^ die kapitalistische G-esellschaf t ist durch die 
Gesetze der Notwendigkeit zum Untergang verurteilt, aber dem 
Einzelnen, der dies erkannt hat, bleibt es unbenommen, sich 
an der Verwirklichung^: dieser Notwendigkeit persönlich zu 
beteiligen oder sicli der Beteiligung zu entziehen. Und dies 
ist Freiheit. 

Die Tolle des Menschen innerhalb der Gesellschaft und die 
Bedeutung der Gesellschaft für das menschliche Individuum 
steht im iviittelpunkt sowjetischen Philosophierens. So erklärt 

- 29 - 

das Mitglied der Akademie der ^^^issenschaf ten in Moskau 

'1^.1^. ?edossejev^ in einem Aufsatz '*I)er Rumanismus in der 
Gegenwart"' (1963), daß die französische P.evolution 1789 zv^ar 
die Lenschenrechte verkündet habe, die wichtigste Aufgabe 

jedoch die Verwirklichung dieser Eechte, der Schritt vo 


Abstrakten zum Konkrete n bilde. Die ''erste Erklärung des 
realan Humanismus'' war das Kommunistische Manifest von Mar 
und Engels und der erste Ausdruck des sozialistische n 


Humanismus ''Die Erklärun^g der Rechte der Werktätigen und d 
ausgebeuteten Volkes" , das die Sowjetrepublik im Januar 1913 


Zitatspr. sDi.. gesetzlich statui...rte Freiheit des Lohnarbeiters ist illu- 
sorisch, weil er sich beim Eigentümer der Produktionsmittel 


verdingen muß, um leben zu können. In dem Buch "Wo stehen 
wir heute?" meint Eduard Spranger, die neuen technischen 
Errungenschaften hätten das seelische Gleichgewicht des 
Menschen gestört. 

Diese Ansicht ist zwar verkehrt, zeugt aber vom wirklichen 
Vorhandensein von Widersprüchen in der gesellschaftlichen 
Struktur. Das Problem darf aber nicht abstrakt gefaßt werden 
in der G-egenüberstellungs l^SllSi^^^^^JiorJsii^^ 
1 i c h e D_3 gr a d a t i o n . Es handelt sich hier nämlich um soziale 
Widersprüche, nicht um die nicht existierenden Widersprüche 
zwischen dem Mengchen un d der Technik . Wir erblicken in der 
Arbeit die Kraft, die den Menschen vermenschlicht, ja ihn 
zum Menschen gemacht hat. Das Privateigentum erstickt aber 

- 3o 

(Zitatspr.) die schöpferischen Möglichkeiten, og ist nicht nur eine 

ökonomische Kategorie. Der wirkliche Humanismus verlangt, 
soll er nicht im Reich der Phrase und des Traumes bleiben, 
dio Abschaffung des Privateigentums, 

Die Vollkommcniieit der menschlichen Persönlichkeit ist eiiE 
Funir.tion der Vollkommeniieit der Gesollschaft. Die Vertreter 
des abstrakten Humanismus v^'erfen den Marxisten vor, daß sie 
dj-e ausgebeuteten Volksmassen zum Klassenkampf gegen die 
Ausbeuter und die unterdrückten Völker zu nationalen 
Befreiungskriegen gegen die Kolonisatoren aufhetzen. Damit 
stellen sie aber den Charakter ihres Humanismus bloß, Dei 
Marxismus verwirft als antihumanistisch und unwissenschaft- 
lich die Theorie, daß der Zwang eine tragende Stellung in 
der Entwicklung der Gesellschaft einnimmt. Die philosophische 
Amiahme 5, daß die Kriege zur Natur des Menschen wegen seiner 
angeborenen Angriffs- und Kampflust g..-hören, ist falsch. 

Auch die beklagte "'Entfremdung'"' kann man nur durch die 
Umgestaltung der gesellschaftlichen Beziehungen beseitigen, 
denn sie ist eine i-j^ntfremdung der Arbeit vom Menschen, in der 
kapitalistischen Produktionsweise. Dieses Problem können 
weder existentialistische noch theologische Mittel, sondern 
die Beseitigung des Privateigentums lösen. Der Existentialis- 
mus erblickt im Menschen eine Fliege, die sich im Spinnweb 
der Y/elt verfangen hat und wuist daher ins Transzendente hin. 
Auch der moderne Thomismus heilt trotz seiner 

-- 31 - 

optimistiücheron Einstellung und "sozialen Natur'' die 
menschliche Persönlichkeit durch Teilnahme am trbersinnlichen. 
Ursprunglich, etwa z.B. in der Epoche der Renaissance, hat 
der Individualismus einen fortschrittlichen Sinn gehabt, als 
Auflehnung gegen den hierarchischen Eeudalismuc und im 
philosophischen Bereich als Empörung gegen die tödliche Herr- 
schaft der Dogmen. Die pessimistische Überzeugung von der Zer- 
rissenheit der Gesellschaft zeigt aber heut., daß sie nicht 
auf einer individualistischen, sondern nur auf einer neuen 
gesellschaftlichen Ebene überwunden werden kann. Die Umgestal- 
tung- der materiellen Beziehun^^on ist aber deswegen kein Selbst- 
zweck. Der Zweck ist der Mensch selbst. Es soll nur die Illusion 
zerstört werden, als ob die seelische Vervollkomunung der 
Menschenwesen ohne radikale Umstellung seiner J^iCbensbedin- 
gungen erfolgen könnte. 

Unsere Gegner sehen im Sozialismus Mvellierung und Gleich- 
macherei* Nun ist die Beseitigung sozialer Ungleichheit 
unser Ziel, aber dies bedeutet, Lenin zufolge, nicht die 
Gleichheit der physischen und geistigen Fähigkeiten des 
Einzulnon. Nicht jedes Kind kann ein Genie worden, aber die 
Gleichheit der Entwicklungsbedingungen soll gewährleistet 
sein. Der Mensch ist als Teil der Natur ein biologisch 
aber auch ein soziales Wesen, .-^ir betrachten den Gourmand 
nicht als Ideal der Menschheit. Nach einigen Philosophen soll 
die tierische Natur des Menschen ihn zur Sunde und zum Bösen 
führen. '.Yer dies sagt, übersieht aber die weit wichtigere 
Fiolle der kapitalistischen Gesullschaf t . Die Philosophie und 

C ' 

oprecher :; 

- 32 - 

die Sozialwiösenschaften müssen die Bedingungen des sozialen 
Fortschritts vorbereiten und die "Überzeugung einimpfen, daß 
die Zukunft den Triumph des Friedens und des Humanismus mit 
sich bringt* Lie Philosophie kann nicht die Hauptprobleme der 
'Menschheit umgehen. Sie muß eine klare, menschliche, friedliche 
Sprache führen und darf sich nicht von den Fragen abv7enden, 
die jeden Iicnschen angehen. 

In ähnlichem Sinne äußert sich einer der älteren sowjetischen 
Philosophen, M.B. Mitin, Mitglied der Akademie der \7issenschaf- 
ten in Moskau und Fachmann für G-eschichte der Philosophie 
(geb. 19o1). 

In seinem Aufsatz 'Rationalismus und Irrationalismus in der 
zeitgenössischen Philosophie Y/esteuropas und Amerikas'' (Moskau 
1963) greift Professor G.A. Kurssanow den Irrationalismus an 
und deutet ihn nach Lenin als eine Furcht der herrschenden 
Bourgeoisie vor der Erstarkung des Proletariats. Der Irratio- 
nalismus greife daher auf tiberholtes, 

J-ittelalterliches , auf 

Thomas von Aquin und sogar auf August in zurück. 

Pie Ausführungen Kurssanows lesen sich wie eine Ergänzung zu 
ähnlichen Angriffen ßegen den Irrationalismus in Deutschland, 

die der heute in der Sowjetunion wogen seines '^"R.evisionis 
verdammte ungarische karxist Georg Lukacs in seinem Buch 



"Pie Zerstörung der Vernunft'* geführt hat, in welchem aller- 
dings noch eine stärkere politische Leidenschaft mitschwingt. 
':/ird nun der »'Westen'- derart des Irrationalismus, d.h. der 
Geringschätzung der Vernunft bezichtigt, so offenbaren die 
sowjetischen Philosophen manchmal einen entwaffnenden Glauben 
an die Allmacht der Vernunft, die sich z.B. im Aufsatz von 
Professor J.K. ivlelwil "Per Mensch im Paumzeitalt er " äußert. 

33 - 

Er fragt sich zunächst > ob die Ausdehnung der Me nc che nkräfte 
ins Weltall bloß quantitativer oder auch qualitativer Natur 
sein wird, was auf die bekannte Zweiteilung im dialektischen 
Materialie^mus anspielt. Er meintj daß .der Umsturz der 
Beziehungen zwischen iiensch und Natur sich so fundamental 
gestalten muß ^ daß der Mensch sich endgültig von der Vorstel- 
lung befreien muß, der menschlichen Erkenntnis und Leistung 
seien überhaupt irgendwelche Grenzen gesetzt. 

Zitatspr.: Gewiß gibt es noch immer Propheten menschlichen Unvermögens, 

inte].lektuellen Ungenügens, aber die 'juellen solcher 
Überzeugungen liegen in den gesellschaftlichen Beziehungen, 
nicht in der V/issenschaf t . Vifir befinden uns heute im Vorabend 
der Kapitulation dreier Eestungen des Unzugänglichen: der 
tiefsten Geheimnisse der Strulitur der Materie, des Lebens und 
des V/eltraumes. Bereits der Pionier der russischen Raum- 
forschung, Ciolkowsk.Y, behauptete, daß sich Generationen von 
Astronauten in den Raumvehikeln erhalten und deren Kinder urd 
Kindeskinder entfernte Welten erreichen können. Die Erforschung 
und Eroberung des V/eltraums werden letzten Endes die Menschen 
davon überzeugen, daß es weder theoretisch noch praktisch 
Grenzen der menschlichen Tätigkeit gibt und daß das geistige 
und physische Potential des Menscher^ unerschöpflich ist. 

Sprechers Melwil verweist darauf, daß Lenlzer wi'^« Friedrich Nietzsche 

oder der Erfinder der Kybernetik, Norbert /iener, im Grunde 
den Tod der Menschenrasse voraussagen. Das sind nach Melwil 
jedoch dekadente Ansichten im Lichte der heutigen Wissen- 
schaft. Die Möglichkeit einer interstellaren Migration ist 

- 34 

keineswegs auczuschließen und daait auch die tJberwindung des 

Erdtodee. Dies haben auch zwei sc^ j ; c±;:c:-^u P'iilo.': cphoii, 
N.A, Warwaro\-;? und E.T, Tadejev^^ anerkannt. Das Schicksal des 
Agnostizismus wai entschieden^ al.:: die mechanistische 
'v7eltansicht durch die dialektische ersetzt wurde, denn damit 
war bewiesen^ daß es qualitative Unterschiede gibt und daß es 
nicht möglich ist, alles auf einfache, elementare Dinge 
zurückzuiühreno Im Zeitalter Kants und sogar >Spencers war es 
noch möglich, das Unerkennbare zu behaupten, heute entbehrt eine 
solche Annahme jeder vernünftigen G-rundlage. Die Astronautik 
beweist nicht nur ein ungewöhnliches Ausmaß und Tiefe, sondern 
einen phantastischen G-rad der Präzision des Wissens. Das 


Ignorabismus •' , das Du Bois -Re.ymond in seiner berühmten Rede 

vor weniger als hundert Jahren aussprach, hat heute keine 


G-eltung mehr. 

Diesjow jetische Philosophie hat gewaltige Anstrengungen gemacht, 
um die heuristische Fruchtbarkeit des dialektischen Materialis- 
mus, bzw. der sogenannten dialektischen Logik, auf dem Gebiete 
der VVissenschaf t , namentlich der Ph./sik, nachzuweisen. Dabei 
stellt diese Logik eigentlich eine auf Hegel zurückgehende 
Icgizistische Naturphilosophie von Engels und Lenin dar. 
li.Eo Omelianowsk.Y will z.B. im Aufsatz "Dialektischer 
Widerspruch in der -Quantenmechanik" zeigen, daß das von Niels 
Bohr und der *'Kopenliagener Schule^' der Physik aufgestellte 
Prinzip der Komplementarität, demzufolge die Iiikroteilchen 
sowohl Korpuskular als auch /elleneigenschaf ten offenbaren, 

- 35 

nur auf Grund des dialoktiscehn GrundsatzeG des Widerspruchs 
seine Begründung findet. 

P.V. Kopnin erklärt in einem Aufsatz: ''Der dialektische 
x'.'iaterialismus ist die Logik der moderne n wissenschaftlichen 
Si?Lt^LL?LliiS£'' ^^^ begründet dies in folge ndei Weisen 

Zitatspr . 

l'ie Objektivität ihrer Gesetze ist es, die die materialistische 
Dialektik zu dieser Stellung befähigt. Die Gesetze der 
Dialektik stimmen nämlich überein mit den allgemeinsten 
Gesetzen der Bewegung, der Selbstbev^egung der Erscheinun^jen der 
objektiven V/elt. Die Dialektik als Lo-ik der i/issenschaf t 
verbindet die Objektivität der wissenschaftlichen Begriffe und 
Theorien mit iteer Veränderlichkeit und Dluüität. Auch beweist 
die Dialektik, es sei urjnöglich, eine über die Entwicklung 
hinausgehende wissenschaftliche Wahrheit festzustellen. Diese 
Überzeugung deckt sich mit derjenigen von Meliuchin, es sei 
unmöglich, die Unendlichkeit endgültig zu definieren. 

Sprecher: Ferner erklärt Kopnin, das Denken weise drei Stufen auf: die 

animalische, die menschliche und die maschinelle, in der die 
Maschinen die Denkfähigkeit ersetzten. In ihnen offenbare sich 
die Vernunft in ihrer reinsten Form, ungestört durch Neben- 
erscheinunger. In diesem Sinne sei die Ilaschine als Denk- 
Instrument dem Denkapparat des menschlichen Individuums 

Dör bereits erwähnte G.A. Kurssanow bemerkt in einem Aufsatz 




'Die logiGcheri GruncisätzG der l7issenGcha.f t "' , daß bereits 
Albert Einstein auf dirj logischen Bestand teile der Physik 
hingewiesen habe, so z.B, auf den Zusammenhang zwischen 
CJeometrie und Physik. Er habe darüber in einem berühmten 
Vortrag erklärt, daß seine Theori- dei; Pelativität die 
i-enntnis und das Studium dieser Zus ammenhän,ge voraussetzt. 
Auch ITiels Bohr habe in seinen Memoiren ''Quantumph:/sik und 
Philosophie-, die zuerst in russischer Sprache erschienen ' 
sind, betont, wie notwendig es sei, die logischen Grundlagen 

der verschiedenen Sparten der Wissenschaft zu untersuchen. 
Auch Werner Heisenberg behandele den Zusammenhang der Erkennt- 
nistheorie und der Physik. Wichtig sei aber vor allem, was 
jene Wissenschaftler darüber gesagt haben, die Anhänger des 
dialektischen Materialismus waren, so S.I. WawilxDw^ dieser 

zeige wie innig die Verknüpfung zwischen Philosophie und 
Physik bei Galilei, Gassendi, Bescartes, Kepler, Newton, 
Lomonossow, Mendelejew, Umow, Planck und -Einstein war. Dies 
gelte für alle Physiker, die einen breiteren Ausblick haben. 
Wawilow habe auf die Wichtigkeit von Lenins Werk ''Materialis- 
mus undEmpiriokritizismus"' für die Entwicklung der Physik und 
überhaupt auf die Wichtigkeit der Ideen des dialektischen 
Materialismus für die Wissenschaft im allgemeinen hingewiesen. 
Unlängst habe der rumänische Lenker A. Joja (Zhozha) vorge- 
schlagen, ein "Novum Organen Bialecticum" , eine dialektische 
Propädeutik der Wissenschaf t , auszuarbeiten. Die Hauptaufgabe 
einer derartigen logischen Analyse der Wissenschaft wäre es, 
das dynamische (dialektische) Y/esen der wissenschaftlichen 

37 - 

Systeme zu finden und die Mittel und V/ege einer weiteren ' 
fruchtbaren Entwicklung der wissens'cliaf tlichen Erkenntnis 
der Welt zu entdecken. - Wir sehen, daß Kurssanow hier das 

■ ?fort "dialektisch- in Klammern setzt und es dadurch ^gewisser- 

maßen als gleichbedeutend mit "dynamisch'' hinstellt. 
Iian kann freilich nur die allgemeine leststellung machen, daß 
die meisten Physiker bisher in ihren Forschungen ohne den 
"dialektischen Materialismus" mit seinen Aufschlüssen ausge- 
kommen sind. ^ ■ 

Der Logiker der Universität Moskau, M. N. Alexe jew, beklagt 
sich in der Zeitschrift "Pilossowski je ' Nauki''' (Philosophische 
Wissenschaften, 1962), daß die zwei hauptsächlichen 
Zeitschriften für Philosophie in Rußland "'Woprossy Filossofii" 
(Die Fragen der Philosophie) und "Pilossowski je Nauki" wenig auf 
auf dem Gebiet der Logik publizierten; man müsse aber die 
neuesten Errungenschaften dieser Wissenschaft, insbesondere 
den russischen Pädagogen, zugänglich machen; der klassischen, 
der dialektischen und der mathematischen Logik einen 
größeren Platz im Hochschulstudium einräumen und eine 
besondere Zeitschrift "Woprossy logiki- (Fragen der Logik) 
begründen. Eine solche Aufnahme der mathematischen Logik 
in das Hochschulprogramm bedeutet eine Liberalisierung 
gegenüber der Stalinära, da frühei die symbolische oder 
mathematische Logik innerhalb der mathematischen Disziplinen 
einen notdürftigen Unterschlupf suchen mußte. lirre bürger- 
liche Herkunft wurde verdächtigt. Las erste Handbuch der 
mathematischen Logik ist in Rußland erst I959 erschienen» 

- 38 - 

CS nennt sich '^Elemonte der mathematischen Logik'* und hat 
P.S» Nowikow zum Verfasser. Trotzdem blieb die Ablehnung der 
analytischen Philosophie En^^ands und Amerikas bestehen^ und 
zv;ar wegen ihres "Krvptoidealismus und okeptizismus '■ . Crcwisse 
Lockerungensind aber auch hier bemerkbar. Noch im Jahre 1959 ' 
hat der kaukasische Philosoph a.A„ Brutian die semantische 
Philosophie des Westens im Buch *'Die Erkenntnistheorie der 
allgemeinen Semantik-' scharf kritisiert und - man muß sagen- 
ohne genügende Kenntnis derselben - verdammt. Aber im Juni 1964 

erschien das Buch des Leningrader Professors LoO Resnik 


•'Die gnoseologischen Fragen der Semiotik'% das viel sachli- 
cher ist als die Schrift seines kaukasischen Vorgängers . Man 
sieht alsoj daß das Eindringen der Philosophie des Westens 

über nicht ideologische Disziplinen wie Logik und Semantik 


Ein größeres Interesse bietet in der ungeheui'on philosophi- 
schen "Explosion' in Rußland die Behandlung der Geschichte 
der Philosophie, weil die russischen i.iarxisten hier andere 
Bewertungsgrundlagen gebrauchen als die Philosophen des 
\7estens. La der dialektische Materialismus als Gipfel und 
Abschluß aller Philosophie behandelt wird, gestaltet sich die 
Beurteilung der einzelnen Lenker der Vergange nlieit anders. 
Sie werden bewertet nach Maßgabe ihrer stufenweisen 
Annäherun^an das Ideal des dialektis chen Materialismus . 
Leswegen erhalten gewisse Lenker, wie im Altertum Epikur 
und Lemokritus, auch Heraklit , in der Neuzeit der Leterminist 


Spinoza, die Philosophen der französischen Aufklärung?, 

schließlich Hegel und Ludwig Eeuerbach, ein ganz anderes 
Gewicht als sie in den bisherigen Crcschichten der Philosophie 
innehatten. In diesem Sinne ist die sechsbändige, von der 
Akademie der ?\fissenscha.ften in Moskau herausgegebene 
'■'Geschichte der Philosophie" verfaßt , als deren Herausgeber 
die Professoren M.A, Dynnik, M.T. Jowtschuk, die uns bereits 
bekannten B.M Kedrow und B.M. Mitin, dann t/i, Ojserman, 
A.Po Okulow zeichnen. Ursprünglich gehörte auch O.Y/. Trachten- 
berg zu den Herausgebern. Einer von ihnen^Li.!. Jowtschuk, 
erklärt in einem Aufsatz -'Zur Präge der ideologischen 
Gemeinsamkeit der fortschrittlichen philosophischen Lehren 
der Völker des Ostens und Westens im 19. und 2o. Jahrhundert^', 
daß sowohl in der westlichen als auch in der östlichen 
(indischen, chinesischen, arabischen) Philosophie matcrialistisci 
Ansätze vorhanden seien. Die russische Philosophie lehnt also 
die im V7esten beliebte Scheidung- der westlichen und orientali- 
, sehen Mentalität ab. P-'s sei nicht wahr, wenn man behaupte, 
die ürientalun seien nur mystisch und irrationalistisch 
eingestellt, nur der Westen sei die geistige Heimstätte des 
Eationalismus, Emp- irismus und Iiaterialismus . Mit anderen 

Worten^ das Hinstreben zum dialektischen Materialismus 

c! n 


eine V/eltorscheinung. Außerdem sagt Jowtschuk, es sei eine 
•'unwiderlegbare Tatsache", daß Ägypten und Babylon, Indien 
und China die Wiege philosophischen Lerikens gewesen seien. 
Er sagt ferner.' 

Zitatspr.: ''Lie Geschichte der Entstehung und Vorbereitung des dialek- 
tischen Materialismus in Deutschland und in anderen Ländern 


- 4o 

Westeuropas ... widerlegt die Vorstellung , als ob der 
Leninismus eine rein russische oder östliche Erscheinung 
sei. Der Leninismus^ der moderne Ilarxismus , welcher auf der 
Philosophie des dialektal chen liateiialismus beruht, ist eine 
internationale Lehre, die auf eigene Art die Probleme des 
sozialen Lebens und der Wissenschaft sowohl in den Ländern 
des Westens als auch des Ostens löst,'' 

Sprechero Der größte Unterschied aber zwischen den Philosophen der 

Sov\^ jetunion und denen des Westens liegt nicht so sehr in 
verschiedenen Ansichten, sondern beruht auf ihrer persönlichen 
Stellung^ Die russischen Philosophen sind nicht so sehr 
Mitglieder einer gewissen philosophischen Schule oder philoso- 
phische .Sir^elgänger , als vielmehr akkreditierte, maßgebliche 
Theoretiker einer regierenden politischen Partei. Wenn sie 
ins Ausland gehen, so tun sie es nicht als Einzelpersönlich- 
keiten, sondern als Yfortführer einer Piegierung. 


:^ß 720-1 

/U^jt -w-^^t/ C^ ^'-^ ^ ^ 




-U?/^ /)n-t^ ^fXXifA-^^ ^ 


V — 

6iC^ WEST 12/ i>rRt£F / 

Dl« mexlkönlsohe f^hlloaophio 

— .. — .- ■ . ^ 

HEW YORK, ^' T. lOOif 

*^«- MAX RiEStjc 

3ift 55iim Beginn des 20. Jnhrhnnderts war die Phlloaophle der lateiname- 
rUconlirOhen Länder niassgeblloh von den Denkern des europäischen Kontinents 
beelnflus«t, Da» polltlsohe Vorbild der Kolonlalliinder, ile die sponlaohe 
Herrschaft abgeaohuttolt hatten^ sag av^ar die amerlkanlodxe Bundeeverfa»- 
eung g^w^aen sein, aber diese Verfaaaung ontepraoh nloht den gesellsohaft- 
Hohen '•Tarhältnlsaen dieser Länder , daher nahm aaoh die polltlsohe Kntwiok- 
luag g?%n« andere Formen an als In den Vereinigten Staaten, öelötlg suohten 
ale Anaohlusg nanientlloh an die franzöalsohe Anfklärimg nnd den franzö- 
•löohen PosltlTlsmua.Abßr das apanisohe kultaielleprellglöse srbo wurzelte 
dort In äLBX Tl^fe md diesem waren die Strömungen An angelsäohalschen 
Welt Tölllg fremd.Dabel waren diese i^lonlalländer um ein Jahrhundert 
aelter alr^ das englische Spraohgeblet Bordamerikas« Mexiko let dabei 
als ''HueTa BspaSa'' iDeuapanlen) die älteste spanische Pflensstätte auf 
dem araerlkanittohen Kontineat^und es Ist dabei nloht etwa sUd-sondern mit- 
tel -und nor damer ikanieoh^Dle Hauptstadt des AStekenreiohes Mexico-T«»noch- 
tltlan wxrAe am 13 Auguöt 1621 »erstört und am IB.Jnl 15S4 tmfen bereits 
iwölf spanieohe Bettelmönohe^Pranaiskaner, Dominikaner und AuguBtiner in 
Mexiko ein^ura die Indianer zu bekehren entsprechend den Instruktionen, 
die bereits der x>roberer ron ^exlco Uernioi Cortes ron der zrone erhielt: 
// 31e mttssen von Anfang an im 31nne behalten, dass das erste 31el Ihrer 
Bxpedltion darin besteht, Sott su dienen und den ohrlstUchen Glauben su 
rerbreiten. -Kle Plünderung der Ooldsohäta^ lag freilich auf einer anderen 
Bfbene.- Dif> aatekiaohe öeliebte des Cortes ,Mal Ina, genannt ^Die Zunge»* 

verstand spanisch tnäL iliren^Titter spräche Hahuatl« 

imm mexikanl3Chc^ Denker unserer ^elt üdmundo O^ßorman, meint ,dnaa die 
spanische Kultur die tradilloueile europäische Kultur gewesen iat.die 
eugliache aber damals Im 16«Jaiirhundort die w^AtttL% Zultur jener ^oit re- 

prä^entlerte^W&hrsnd aber die Spanier versuchten, ihren Gebieten eine Eopie 

euue r Ikanl s he 
der spanischen Zultur zu schaffen, so dass eine besondere «r f »«^H ^^^^ 


kaum öiohtbar wurde, habeu die ^tigläader die freie ßntteXt\mg der Kolonien 
zugelaeeen, do dasa eigeaUloli nur die nordamarUcanlsohe Kultur als amerl- 
kaniaoh au betraohten wäre* Xle spanlaohen Siedler böganaen dleaea Werk 
erat naoh 1810 d*h* naoh der arrelohung der Dixabhängiglcelt wäiirend der 
napoleouiüohea Kriege .Da sie den ürfolg der Nordamerikaner vor Augen hat- 
ten, ahmten sie die polltlsohen Formen dea nmerlkaniaohen Nordena naoh; 
gleloh« eltig wollten sie slonlvon den Ihnen vertrauten Lebenaformen nicht 
freimachen, Ja aie wollten ale gar nloht aufgeben und aus dieaem Zwioapalt 
erklären sioh die ??lderaprüohe im Leben dea apaniachen Amerika* 

Wie tiefgreifend dieaer apaniaohe üinfluaa geblieben , zeigt 
a#B* eine Aausaerung dea berühmteaten mexikaniaohen Denkera Jose Vaaoon- 
oelca -der awel Jahre vor aeineia 1959 erfolgten Tode unter anderem folgen- 
des schrieb: In unserer hlapano-amerikaniaohen Welt hat Jüngat unaer 
SohrlftstQllor don Bodrlgo QarolA Ireylno «.ohne waitere srklärimgen 
•In Reeuine der Arb«iterpolitlk Philipp» li auagagraben, der von den 
Agenten des wigela&cheisohen Imperiallamua als "ein ungeheuer des nticfc- 
»ohrltts " dbxgeatellt wird, "dessen Handltmgen all onaer ühglüoi: erklären", 

Äun in dciii^elben aeltaltex. In welohem Philipp II den Arbeiter in Spanien 

h fitte , K ttetiJiii; hiel t 
befreit kx^Jücfc/iaa liberale üingiaad aeine Arbeiter in Huiger und Aalend, 

waa Karl Liarx und aeine Oenoaaen eret im 19« ''ahrhundert brandmarkten* 

* po litlaohen 

Angeaiohta deaaeUphaben die ¥iifaanr 3oh0pfer unaerer/Verf aasungen 

und unserer Arbeitergeaetagebung ea nicht nötig gehabt, trUbe Vorbilder 

in der Qeaetagebung Snglanda und der Vereinigten Staaten au auohen. zumal 

bereit» unser guter König Don felipTheohon 1577/ein Hdikt fUiO»ranche-Comte' 

erlleaö|,tte einen achtstündigen Arbeitatag für die Arbeiter der Befeatigungen 

und 4b dck, verkst&tten feataetate**.. Derselbe x>on ?elipe,uni^er Künig.verfligte 
apäter ^im mam^ jbe ^- r^^^^k^^st^f^^^y^ ^^-- — n^..^. 

lg 8 ruhe 
>ld und nicht in Haturalleiatun- 


achtatündogen Arbeitstag ihren Lohn atota 

gen erhielten* sine Urkunde vom 19. Oktober 1678 verfügte, daaa die Zi merleute 

und Maure, J.d.. ,^ ^^^ 

''^age »» 



»erlen «««* bekämen. •.Vae nooh berwrkenawrf , iat...t.t V..oo^H^llT^?i^ 
l.t dl« Tataao.« ,d«. f "^ij^H .wainal die„«fll,ng- d« 

H ■ ""'^^'^*'" <*^^^ etTOB an«rkami«r;^M csan heut« 

-Strelkr«/cht" nennt „Die Geschieht« i»fear daaV^^^^^^ , 

ÄLi>'a^ar,aa8a er/ 30 rtmoii wie möglich 

n» «.cl«,.l^.lt..„.^^„,,„^.„ ,^,.^„ oruad.,..^ „ «rf u,t. ,„^ 

B1.C0,.. - - M... B.«t«U«g Pwupp. II „igt,,,, 3.^ 3,„, ,,^; ^^^ 
oeloi mit dem apaniaohen Srbe identlflaiert. ** 

Fragt raan, welchen Slnfluas die Fnifn» it.. -* 

üiiusB axe zuitur der eingeborenen Indlane» auf 

die Eultur de, Spanier in .exilco au.übte,so lautet die Antwort: Qar kel 
n«,d.nn dl. B.Uglon bildete den Miueipunkt de. .«„i.n. der Indianer 
und der .panler.aher diese Beligionen trennte ein Abgr^.d... drängte 
eloh aber bald eine ander, frag, den .roherem auf: ob die Indianer al. 
«ielohbereohtigt. üenaohen anauaehen wär.n.Ala aolohe worden .le yon 
• in.» Teile der 3panl.. ar.erl.aant;«» andarej» aahen .le nloht al. i.en- 
.ohe« .sondern ala vdlde 2iar. an und behandelten «le d^ment.prechend. 
Die l*..;re nach de™ Oharalcter der Indianer warde während der apanischen 
Herrachaft theor.tlech nie gelöst, aber Ha..entrenn'xng warde trotzdtm 
nicht elng,führt.wahr8Cheinllch ao^on de.wegen.weil .u wenige apanieohe 
frauen nach A.eril:e Icamen. Hernai Corte'i^r.lärte in seine. Zweiten Bericht 

daae/i^gealcht. der .ataache .da.. lleM. .oi^^A":^^ ^ und ohne 
B..iehung au anderen mit Vernnnft begabten VöUcern ^Ueb, geradezu bewun- 
dernawert achelnt. wie dieae .enachen die Vernunft in allen Ihren Angelegen- 
helten .txr Anwendung bringen". Die. war auch die Ansicht t^t'^^^rtoXo^ 
d. la. Ca.a..d.r «ttöÄ ausfuhrt.. da., ieder Lienach ohne Rüclcaicht auf 
^. Bildung und mtur «rund.änÖiE^SJ^|§|ff^^5|H-^^ 
lÄ^Uu. hab.n Ver.tand und .Vllien.alle haben die fünf äue.eren und die 
Tier Inneren Sinne.alle auchen da. Gute und finden Gefallen am 
Oa.oh«ackTollen und Ireudlgen.all. und haa.en da. üebel- 
(Hlstorla de la« Indias.Band II. 3«it, %'^A^ 

"Sa gibt Mensohen Yersohledener jSntwloklungaatufe^aber alle aind kultur-> 

fähig" ,meinte/laa Caaaa.Sr baatrltt dabei nicht die Richtigkeit der ^ 

Behauptung des Ariatotelea^dasa derjenige ,der duroh seinen fteiat mäais^ 

denjenigen baherraohen milaae^der bloaa kSrperlloh arbeiten ^^xxs^i^^i .^Mitr v^< 

aioh dar apanlaohe Humanlat Juan Oinea de Sepulreda aua Oordoba (etwa um 
X570) ^loAef» um die Teraklarung der Indianer au rechtfertigen, aber auch <ijtH^ 
musate xugeben^daaa der ütiteraoi^ied iwiaohen Indianern und Spaniern 

ungefähr ao beaohaffen ael wie der Ewlaohen Elndern und Brwaohaenen oder 
Männern und frauen» -^ 


Bei den mexikanischen Steinzeitmenachen kann man schwerlich 
von einer Philosophie im europäischen 3inne aprechen.Aber in unserer 3?eit 
hat Miguel Leon-Portilla reraucht ,ihre öedankenwelt aua llrkunden «»« def* 
15. Jahrhundert^ au erachlieaaen. £a gibt nämlich Kodizea in der Hahua- 
aprachejjLiederaammlungen^ die solche Beispiele der alt mexikanischen Lite- 

.d Berichte über ihre religiöaen 3itten-manohe in der Bilderachriftr 
aufbewahren» Es sind auch die Harnend 
li e f e rt », ferner imm dek. alten Welaen, den "^V 
In Sprüchen und aonstigen literarischen 

meistena fürat:^iche^ Autoren-^ 

^tinime'V, überliefert, die 

ihr Wisaen zum Besten 

gaben« Bemerkenswert aind die manchmal rührend gefasaten|Uud hohen ]^oeti« 

sehen \7ert selgenden Ziagen über die Vergänglichkeit dea Bcxxxttlakni Lebena . 

über M^ VOTaTifff der Kunst, deren Inbegriff ala ''Blume und Gesang** bezeichnet 

wird« Pa liegen gewisse Anschauungen meistena religiöser Art zugrunde, abor 
es hiesse den Begriff '*Phllosophle<^lt j a4* e fctte»« «ifc AAe^ifln sie einibeziehan, 
mag allerdings an die Philosophie des Orients erinnern und richtig 

gelten ja auch die eingeborenen Mexikaner als ursprünglich aaiatisober 
Herkunft is^ie Azteken und ihre Vorgänger , die zivilisatorisch höher stehen- 
den Tolteken, deren Weisheit die Azteken übernahmen, sahen in der Welt eine 
'on Ozeanen umgebene 

"in Tier farbige Abachnitte d,h» Quadranten oder Viertelkreise 


elngetellt|lst, einen blauen,weiasen, roten und schwarzen* ^^^ ^^^ Osten 



n.nn.n, l.t da. «Met d« LlohtB. d.r W»ohtbar..eU »nd d.. :-.b.n.. 3. 
«ird d»ioh dl. «IS.. I«b. .smboll.l.rt. I>.r H«d.n i.t d.r .oh«*«<inadx»t. m d.B dl. Tot.n b.^.b.n w,Td.n. I. W.t.n da. «bl. 1 
d.. Bot.da. Ha« d.r Sonn.. Im 3üd.n da. blnu. Gebiet. Ble.. ,1er Teil, 
laufen Im Habol der Hrde .n,.«,.. Daneben gib. e. a.ob .Ine vertikal. 

Hlntellnns d.r ,-elt in atoov«er.e,d.r.n b»cb».e. dl. .»ter ,lnne^»n. 

:,r blan. Himmel Tereinist .lob mit d.n blaneu,rn,dl. dl. Krd. 

^ a 4^vs i^ni. ^nY\A die Sterne .die Kometen, 
«geben m «ln.m ««iilbe, auf dem aloh.der „ond.dle . 

.1. sonn, nnd d.r «rgen.t.rn be..«.n. .. .ab fünl zeltalter d.r w.U.x« 
.xUt,n., m jedem herrscht. .Ine^t. Gottheit, die mit d.n and.r.n 
im Kampf. lag.bU da. «Ualtar de. .legrelch» Ootte. ..r.t.rt wnrd.. 
,ede. Zeitalter hei... ".ol"; Jeden ".Ol" .er.t»rt .In. ,».. 

» 4.. -14.-* A^r. Tda der Luft.dea Wassera uad des peuera. 
2s gab blaher das Zeltalter der -rde,aer i.uiv,uo 

,.t.t herreoh. da. Z.ltalter d.r 3e,.enng.da. nnx duroh »e.onder. blutig. 
Opf,r fU. dl. erhalten ^d.«.nn man e. nloht »rniohte. eehon 
«111 mn., »an nooh blutige B.neoh.nopf.r bringen. i)le. taten auoh 
41. .1. dl. «aohbar.tSMn. Ub.rranuten. um unter den 

genen ilenaohenopfer zu auohen. /^ 


Die maian«! wuraen ewai reohtlloh nloht verstlert , aondern in 
Leibelseci dtf P«tt«»lher»n- des "euoomenaero" -rerwenaelt.Ihm wurden 
die Indianer ■amt dem Boden miteretellt, dlo^Indisrer wareo ©n den Boden 
gebrmdtn,aie wurden oIb ieibeigeae trlDutpfliclitie vn?. zti Frondieneten 

ge zwangen« 

3a gaT) keinen Tr«bergeng von den Anächauangen flei Aateksn zu denen 

der Spanier. Die Kult^xr der Azteken, die hauptsächlich künotlerlsohe Wert« 


herrorgenraoht hatte, und auf der Heligion beruhto,vm>de ßv.n roli(Tl5«pn 
Gründen ve?niohtet. Der Biaohof von Mexico Ziimtrega rfhirvt «sich in einem 1531 
geschriebenen Briefe, desa er 50ö 'i'eiapel uad 20.000 r/Jt.-en seratör*; hatte. 
Man wütete in einem ölaubenaeifer gagen dio Idole ,Monun3nt9,3:-.ulptnren.Die kt 
hleroglyphisoh*.n Büeher von Texoaoo wurden aaf elaaia aoheitorhiufen rerbrannt 
Die Sprache und daa Alltagabrauchtum lieaa man -anseaoiorin. ü-ra? t?erardino 
de Sahagiin labte 60 Jahre in Heuäpanien studiert« dia GseoH-ichte und 
die Sprache der Eingeborenen in der "Hiatcria general de las ooeas de Hueva 
BepaÄa" (Allgemeine Geschichte der Angslegenheiben Heuspsniens) . Die Miaeio- 
nare otT^rr^ die zahlreichen Dialekte der in dinni sehen Sprachen. Mönohe 
gestalteten die mexiJcanlaohe Bilderachrif t iu das spanische Alphabet um 
tind übermittelten die mündliohen Sagen al3 Litoretur, andere kompilierten 
»»rterbüoher der Indianischen Sprachen. In den Jahren 1S24 bie 1672 vollao- 
gen die Bettelorden die geistliche Eroberung Mexicos , um dann den Jesuiten 
Platz SU machen. 

irager h,«pt.a<,n.ok Mdnohe ,ar.n .r.a u. a« » ."Krlr^ ^f^t^ 

aucaophl.. foietc äort en«vMd.r d.m U. •^ 
Oder Suaroa« 

omaa r» Aanlno odn mu Sootu 

«lu Jrofe.a.r d„ ünlr.ratat von ll.:aoo y.soo d. «.l,„g. 

rj! Z'":" "' "'""'" °"'" '"" "»»'--»»" «"'tW fr« Na.„ .1. ai.„agt«. Me Mo„«„,j,„ i,„,„„ ^, ,^.^ 

^^ •«.«, i-.-.rcmi inn an tu «Insttgea Apos»«l nnd 

•r a,^ Jiix aä .In prliiHTs, »riitsntan, einfuhr«. 

!■> d„ 3,.lT.lUtU r=n E,^oo.da. .1. da. Ath.n d„ ,.a.n W.1, b.. 
.elot..t v.„d.. ..nutzt, .an dl,„„ „>^,,,^„ .,, ^ ^,^ ,_^^^^^_^_ 
tu von S.U:^..,.o da.J^nie. de. So.ola.ti.«. d.. ^^d„. ,«Mng, d. 
30.0.^. .«voraeendate .,|f„l,etl,„ ,„,,„ ^ ,„ u.,ai.rhnnd.,t 
d.. A.aurUn.x^cnao ,m.phcna. d. la T.r.oru...ln ^.nnd d,. t..o. 

d. <uUoe. .nd^noio« d. X,. ea.„. ,1. j»^i^ ^, »i„r.Uät.n 

TOn AlaaXa und aala^noa . da, d.. indl.n,a, angehört. n.d IM» ^t « 
7^au naoh ..xloo .a„ „d dort 150d .tarh.ür ™r v.rfa...r d.. .rat« 

phUoaopUl.o...n Trairtat. . d^rto «.xlo. l»w g.dru«. ward., iir.« rZi^ 
■*— « 4ort/ u,.d{[;^„.n dr.l. sr ™r .m Anhang« d,. 
P.tru. Hl„pa„„.. tn .«.oher am.loht «.„ra^t. thn d.r „„tg„ i.^». 
ir..«lt I..V. Antonio R^blo.d.r ISM nach ll.:cl„ ),aM.d.rt eo Jahr, „r- 
kraaht. ood .1» ^^ ,,a^,, ^^^. „.r...^,, j„ i,. ,„,,,^,„,4 
Spiel te/i U" ' * - 
Lehrer« ^^ 

Sräg« Kraolen.d.h. In Amerika p«boren« ipanler. VlelT Mch^diewi 

il« Jaa'.at«a ai« Hauptrolle ala Sohrlftatellar und 
^ie aoholnablk .alt,r p«l.hrt wurde .^numaehÄ" 

Zelt imrd« nl, pedrnokt un« befinden eich In dernBlbliotheoa Naclooel 
d. -lexloc- . ao die dr.l wlohtigsf n philoscphlechen erlce d.. jteuiten 
3)i«go «arin da Alo^zaT,aer dan Lebran der neuen Theelcgen.v/zqua« uad 
SttaVa», folgte. 

Dia moderne Philcaophia Im europäUcheu jiuna ioaat. slob .rat 
m der .walten Hälft, da. 18. Jahrhondert. elubOxgarn.aber ale UaUa 
Ihre 7orlänfar In aolohen Ranalaaanoemeaaohen wie Alonao da Teraorua 
und Hublo, die 3loh bemühten die 3oholaatllc von ClbarflUsalgoa logi.tUohen 
Splt.flndlgiceltan .u aäubarn.Dla PhUoaophie u.d 3ohola.tU war 1. 17. 
Jahrhandart la Verfall begriff« und keine, Ihrer /artrotar Uaaaa aioh 
»It dan Männarn daa ror angegangenen Jahrhandarta vargleiohen. Die Philo. 
aophla rarlor .loh in Dlaputationau,' dar b.wuadarta Doiaonücanarmönah 
Pranoiaoo Haranjo ( 1580-1665) .dar in Mexico geboren .oxde und auaxb, 
kftnnta dl. a^m^ da. hl. Ihamaa aua,«ndig und konnte auf einmal vier' 
Peraonen über reraohledona Themn diktieren. 

2«al »eataltan bilden üaborgang von dar Tradition aur lloäamltät: 
die !Ionn.a 3or Jnana Ina. de la Orn. und Don Oarloa de 3igi'en.a , G^^gora. 
aor Jtian« yerfaa.ta eine Dlahtmig "Prlnero Snako-(Der arata Traum) / 
die den grenRenl.sen Wiseenednr.t dea L'enaohen und den ^ilaaerfolg da. 
Strabana nach Ua-an aohUdert. Meae Gedanken -^^n Pro.a «»=*« A ^ 
"Raapneta a 3or Fllotea" jAnUort an die 3ohwo*ter yiiotca) fortseapoat..n. 
Daa fauatlaoh. Oedioht ^Mi «u dan mertorürdlgaten iJrzeugnisaen dar 
.panl«ohen Literatur »während die Prosasobrlft zu den kla.aiaohen Y.rken 
dar apaniaohen Rroaa gehört. Die., frcme flonne verkaufta ihre Bibliothek 
ihr. ^inrlohtung. um Gott allein zu dienen u.d atarb rerhultnia^nuasig 
i«ng fl651^1695). D., 3ohrift.t.llar Safael Lorano beurteilt al. folgend.rmaa. 
W.nn die Diohterin in der "ße.pue.ta a aor yilotea" die baate .roaa ihre. 2eit 
alter, aohuf u«d Jene. ^»^*«^"^Se biet zeigt, das di. hi.toriaohe Grö... d.. 
18. Jahrhundert. begründ.t.j^^.rmÄHfe .i. im "£ aueno" d.m D.nk.n in 
.panl3oh.r Sprach, ein. ao origtn.ll. philoaophlache Dichtung, d... .i, ^, 

kilntm B6ltg«nöd»l«ohen und auah mit keinem spftteren '^ark rdrgllohaii werden 

kann« Der ülatorllter der Phllo&oplile JcbüI aaoe erklärt^ daaa der '^franm'* 

der 3or Juana fwlsohen den philo sophlsohen Dichtungen der Benalsaanoe 

Sa^u^ "fCtx^t SAMf 
und der Anfkläruneaselt yiM«te0iMHMHleMMHMtt#e • £le Literatur der epanl- 

•oben Sprache ^eeiiv^er IMR^ wäre sehr BXTS!i)tmältß9mmmmmfß^^ dleöea 

Gedroht nlo^t voiflianden wär^tWenn es In der Weltgeaohiohte nicht 

jiiSRMM^r''wegen der tMwlasenhielt der 



C<rvi ^ e- 



Oeachlohtfischrelferer» Bae wdlobt wird als Traum gestaltet ana daa Ver- 
langen dea m^naohllchen (Jelatea nach ^^Isaen wird gl^iohfallB ala ein Traum 

angeaehen ,der «nn Scheitern verurteilt Ist« 

Ihres Zeltgenosa eny 
3or Juana nahm die Qedanien/aes rroreöeora der Eather^atik an dtr 7nl- 

; (1645^1700) 
reraität von A'exlco Bon Carloa de ilguenxa y Gougor&/gevMl«Laermaaaen vor- 

weg« 3le/waren In der Phllc&ophle gewlB&erme&aen Autodidakten^ die &lch 

für die Methode der Wlaaenaohaftett, für die Grenzen der Vernunft beeobäf« 

tlgten, mit dem Prcblem^wle aua tw WlBsenßohcvft ein alcherea Wl^^aen 2U 

maohen sei«Slgaene;a freist In seinem Buche **Llbra ßtronlmlca "i fialca** 

fi^roncicleobe und pbjalkalleohe Wage) die Irrtumer der Astrologie nach 

und unter aoheldet awlaohen Ihr und der Astronomie «iir wendet aloh gegen 

den Autorltäteglauben^gogen die Vorurteile und vorgofasaten ^^Inungen 

des Arldtoteles und Ptolemäua^well sie keine genugende Eienatala der Netur 

beafiaaexywAber Slguensa stand nloht auf der Höhe der Wl^^aenaohaft seiner 

aelt«Obwohl aein Buoh 20 Jahre nach demjenigen üewtona eraohlen^kenn-c er ^^^^ 

nlcbtiSinMMmMlMMHMMflriMi^^ wuaate er von Deaoartea 

und Ga38endl«i3r lat der Anslobt^daea Experimente ^ind Beobachtungen keine 
muarelchende GrnnOlage des ^'laaena bildender verlangt ph^ alkalische I^rlden» 
und mathematlsohe Sicherheit« Jmtaie Wlaaenachaft fr agt^naoh Gründen und 
iiuidditäten* dlber dieses ^laaen um die ^eaenhelton können wir nicht er- 
reichen« JerfMiM^^^ose Gaos lM^am»/elnen im Glauben gründenden ph^; Alkali* 



sehen Agnoatlalamus pder sich vom modernen fldeiamua darin unterscheidet^ 
dass dieser Im metaphysls ghen Agnostlxlsmus seine quelle hat« 3lguensa 
versuchte auch die Bhrs der mexikanischen Wlasenschaft und Intellektuall- 

o r 

tat zu retten, iadcu er r.elnt "ea geb^ iiatliöäutlkex auob aus^rhalb 
Dtatsohlands ,äOGar.,.lR den MiKi>aniaoh«n Wttst«nel»n.'' 

r&tßächlioh brpoliten hRaptsiiohlloh die Je»ulton dl» Id««n a«T 
Auficiuximg fuiifals Jahre später nach Mexiko, obwohl der Orden im Jah- 
re 1706 die ?hll.-3ophio dos Arlstotel.B als für die Lehre allein mas«. 
geb#ad 9inj?f5hl and die Irrtümer des Deaoarte» al« für den ütoterrioht 
aohiidlioä v*rduacte. £15^ Ideen der Aufklärung gewannen erst rm da. ^« 
de« la, Jahrhunderts ^ie Oberhand,nber nloht Im Wege der Hoohaohulen, 

•ondern dureh f i U M , mipu M aelteohrift.n, die wls.enaohaftliohe 
Oegenati^de behandelten. 3clt 1776 herrschte in Spanien der aufgeklärte 
ibsolutlBmus und wisaensoheftlloh gebildete Mfinner kam«.n auoh neoh Mexiko^ 
Dae Tnterriohtasyeteia vmrde refo?nl#<rt,«ln T^fbretuhl far Anatomie ge. 

eohaffen.eiae Sohule der ^^hön^n nJnst.« nn« »Ine Bergwerkaakadenle 

uad lH«iiiiiiii \\t.M anoh die aohoTaatlaohe Dialektik aufgegeben 
und die Physik^ Galilsoa und Ne-ztona ala die wahr* Phlloaophle betrachtet 
Indessea blieb die luiuisltion noch Immer .^^^uad verfolgte die mo- 
dernen Idean.insofern sie mit dem katholleohen ölauben und Brauchtum im 
Widerepxuüh standen, iTlohtlg sind In der Ideengeaohiohte üexiko» 
dlG glei:>er:tos de fUoaofia rodernaTslemente der modernen Philoaophie) 
Ton Juan Benito Dias de aaniarra,clne« Jesuiten, der den ^eg In die 
neuzeitlioha Philcaophle «u bahnen rsrauoiite« 

seit 1743 bildete sich eine Grappe von Jeauiten.die awar den aohola- 
stisohen ..rifatotelianas aloht abschworen, aber eine Neigung für modern« 
Wl«««n<iOhuft,aameatliohÄrphjaik und ihr» experimentelle ttthUk« und 

Bathei.,atia«he kethoda seigfin. Sa iat atrittig , ob slo wirklich Anhänger 
der ncdcrnen Phllosophla oder bloaa Beformatoren d«r 3ohola«tik waren 
nauptsaohlloh lehrten ala neben ^S^grieolils che ü Peripathetlkeri die 
Ideen «•« iflocartea and Qaaaendl^Aber ale kennen die Phyalker und sogar 
Deacartes nur aus «^flter Hand, Anoh »1« sind In dieser Hlnaloht Autodldak- 
ten und tragen d«.» ^.danken in "okkulter" Form vor .um kein Aergernla ru 




.rregen.^^«nob«al tragen el. Uiie Aualobteu, die .oholastlaoh. und 
modern« oh.e -«Ttoln.h«^ vor. Dn« phiio.ophlsohe Lloht die.« ßrnpp, 
lit ?r«n-,l.oo JnvUr CUvlJero (1731-1797). ih» empfiehlt «ein Freund 
Ale^re etwas n«hr Hypokrlsle In. Tortroff. fata.ohUoh entaoheldet .loh 
Clavljero nicht Jclar für da» kop^mkanlsohe 3,.tem. offenbar ..eil deaa.n 

.,» — v-»,*4.u^u TrrogüBn war. Der IntelieJctuelle pfthrer dar 
eruppe .er 7. Cnmpoy. 3le alle war.n melctlJcer und/SifJfSSsbd wollten 
«le wlaeensoh^ftllohe B.f^higang dea .exlkanlaoh.n Menschen erwel.en. 

Die TnabhängigkeitareTolatlon fFavoluolon de Independenola ) 
hat die Intel lelctnelle und phllosophlaohe Tätigkeit eh^rfirnächst unter- 
brochen. .3 g.b damals m Mexiko bereit, eine kreolische gebildete Mittel- 
klasse. dl. aue den Angehörigen der freien Beruf e-ir.ten.Adrokaten.der 
unteren tmd mittleren Oeiatlich^elt- be<i«ia«d,deren Int.reae.n aach In- 
aof.rn ,^lt denen der kreolieohen (Jrundbeeitzer übereinstimmten, al. 
^^" ^^'^^^J^J^^^-^-^^Seistllchen und Beglerongaatellen von Europäern 

''"''*'* "T^" ""''" ""' ^""''^ "^ ^"-^ geringeren unteren Posten be- 
eohrfenkt ^«a.vor alle» hatten sie eile atadt-und Oemelndeverwaltungen 
(die V.,u^tntnlentoa") m Ihrer ITnnd nnd darin leg ihre Stärke.Die geistig. 
Waff. der kr«oll.chen Int.lllg^nK nar die Aufklärung und machte .le für 
einen polltli^ohen TTtaBchvmng ^^^ i^jA^^'ol , 

Der «rvTghnte J-ranoieico Xevvler Alegr. aitiert in seinem Buche 
"Theologl.che Institutionen f^ite 206) den Völkerrecht.leUrer Samuel 
Pof/endorf dahin, da.a -;fede Herrschaft welcher Art immer ihren öTaprung 
m einer Vereinbarung oder einem Vertrag «wiachen den Uenechen" hat. Der 
Blnfluss Jean-T.cque. I^cweau». .des.en -Contrat Social" auf ähnlichen 
Gedankengängen beruht.wlrkte sich In ähnlicher Wela. au., zugleich mit 
dem iinflua. Uonteaquleu» ..Voltaire- a und der fransöalachen Sn^yklopÄ- 
diaten. Auch dl. spaniaohen Aufklarer Joyellanoa and iUrtlnea Marina 
wirkte in gleicher Elchtung . Aber noch 1802 wurde der Oeiatllchw oio- 
T«rieta wegen Befürwortung Bouä.eaui.oh.r Gedanken ron der Imulaltlon 


verfolgt. DU Lage änderte öioh abar »als die napolconiaohen Truppen 

Spanien bcaatateu iind cL^x ipfiuiitoohe König »einen Thron yerlcr, ^ 

führten öia 7artret:r der atadtgemöinde Mejcioo -öle Adrokaten Ascarate 

uad nunicntlioh Verdad eug^di«» iU^iexani; »ei an die Gremeindevcr-raltun- 

,gen d^ht an daa VoUfc Äiuaülcgof&JLientAber die Träger dieser Reohte 

seien nioht etwa die Indianer und die i-daohlinge ^sondern die '^hombrea 

honrados'',die ehüXönwerten i-enaohenpd«h# diejenigen, die in den Stedt- 

verwaltingea me-öögobend iJimj AJer diese IJeformbcwegung v/urde duroh 

eine Volksauf stand am lö^aeptember lÖlO üingesttir«t. dessen AnTuhrer 

Don ITigael Hidalgo j Oostilla (17515-1811) war. Obwohl der krcolisohe 

Mittelstand diesen Aufstand führt, nahmen an ihm Bcrg^j^erksarbelter 
und Indianer Bauern Äteil.IIidölfeo wurde von den indianii^ohen 
Banerr auir: Gener&liiisit^ab au&gerufön . ür beseitigte die Leibeig^naohaft 
^^_^ j:^M7il^^ ,,.... ^x>x^^ weiter ging 

naoh i einem Tcdc JOb^ Larit. ikioielos^der die Aufteilung des OrociSgrundbe- 
sitzes niit^r die landlcEen Bauern, die Abechaffang der Ausbcutong in clen 
Bcrgvverleri und auf deJ^ande verlangt« «lir erklärte, dass die 3C0*.J ährige 
Abhänf-lgkcit TCD der iberischen Halbin»äel die schmachvollste Zeit in der 
Geschichte ^.Isxilioö 7i?or,-./ie cpaaißohe Sroberung ,die »'oonq^uista'* sei 
die Hegation der Hechte der i^inheiaiiöOhen gewesen, das Krwaohen ^tit 
Indianer sei die i»iega^.ion der iiegation, der Unabhängigkeitskrieg ^ei 
ein Krieg der '•reoonc^iilsta'* ,d.h. der üuruokeroberung.Auf dem Kongress 

-^ 'S 

von Chilpanolngo ,der die JPreiheit i^exikos am Idtt 8»3epteraber 1813 

rerkliiidete, rief Uorolos die öeister der verstorbenen nuixikoniachen 

Kaiaer^lootoÄuma,Oeo£Jima,Saauhtciaoo,21cotenoatl und 0al2ontziu an 

und forderte die YereanÄuolten auf, die Beleidigungen und I^rniedrig^ingm, 

die auf den 12 .August 1521 aurüokglngen, zu rächen.- l'an berief 

•ich In :!exlko immer laehr !:uf eine- "volonte »^^enerale" d.h* Volkawillen 

Im franÄ5?i£ch2n Stil.^fc ürt^chien auch die erete nexikaniaohe liberale 

zeltung '•ai Fenoador liberal*' unter der Führung von Fernande« de 

-». ..«T ni STREfcT / 

u EJ.. , ox. 1810 aer uinfjues der Bauern «arUok 
•ine icoaaervativ« nrciuuug u.l.. Ubcrhaud. uer l^^oru. vandte .ioh geg^n 
die Ubercieu Id.en. der .Huoni.u. Bc.latain verteidigt die ananlaoha 
-/•borlicfrune ,. a ^rlcU^t.ui. tTr^blxax^^ig^cit a«i .war gat .abor die 
Mexücaucr Tür sio nooh ni.üt r.lf..,..,,, ,, ,,,,,,,, ,,,,, ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ 
daeaer r,,a3cticn. «r wl.d .ta.tachef n.,d ni.^t den laisertitel an. .r 
erkläxt.di. alte sa.slls.haftlicba Ordnung nt-sse bestehen b^-iben d.r 
2aBa.r-:enhaug Mt d.r .panisoten Ver^auseuhelt atirfe ni.oht abp^xft'a.n . 
-i«i».Ä-3 UuaLhüJ^i^ieit s,i eine -d^ßet.. ei^ TomparSaine Loelöaung 
oäne .raoh'.;.i« H.tur .«nrae kolue .p.,..,. ^, ,i, ,,,,,,^,^ ^^^^^ ^^^^ 
darin den x???g'slii ^iar piivsl -^oiiAri sssf t*.,^^,4. ^... ^ 
MUatcxen nue liberal« .praoU..b.r .r betrachtet sich selbst 
al. den .usdruo. dar "volcnte .enerolo" d... aos Willen, der Allgemein 
und «murt. ..aht kür..e aai' ic Jno konatlt.i.r.nde VerBanunlung ' 
übertragen .arden.J^er IturMdiemue wur dera,.aoh die Portsetnung de. 
Kolonialismus in .Wt.. abgeänderter Perm. Ab.r Iturhlde nneste im 
I^ära 132Ü zur.ioitret«n.-..cil der rongreaa untoratut.t durch die Komm, 
nan des Lnadea und den ireoii.oh.a .itteiafc,nd,die Soareräultät an 
•ich rlcsÄ.^evero T'^idenado nun den "Oontrat aocial" von 
Bouaaeau ins und OU u^eb.raet.ung wurde al. i^ortaet.ung der 
aohriften von .a^-tine. : ar/lna eria^t, ..a offenbar dca '^.rlc annehmbare, 
«reohilnen In.Bm aollte. Während alao die liberalen die Belaatangeu " 
der Vergangenheit aba.haff.n und eine neue Q««eUsc»tnft'^iE/;ollte 

naren die Iturbldlstan d.a t.tstohlich Vorhandene.d.h.die 
Eclonialvcraältnicso an«atnüpfen..olohe Ten.eaz.n legen auch später 
altcinauder iit iJtreit. 

^^ia Tauiger ümcahwiia^ d«^ is^i *tig.u aildes trat 1867 
.in, als dl. Ideen dar ijolorm (i^cforu..) dxe alte Ordnung d„ 
lolcnlalh.rrochr^t erlag.der Kaleer ila^.iiian ron liexioo auf dem 
Hügel dar »locken ron ,u.retaro «.che^wn wurde und die Hepublik 


enagtilflg« Im 3<i^;tel "ar. Am 16. Jeptcmber 13G7 hijjet Gablüo BarroOa 
«Ine ""Orncion olrloa'' (liiirsarliche Anapxaoha ),lu der er aiiaführtö, daaa 
Htxlico nunnehr lUe letstc I^edoite dat ^'o/tBoiirltte auf der Walt a^l^ 
iUer bättien dl^ liberalen Idö^n Ira JCt4>5^"iii dan i<:ori;:»crYatiY«n ob^iiegt* 
Die i»l«taph?allc ler rr3ih?lt tricuaiiiiiei'o ^.aa iuxmpf /.\i^ der Tlieolcgie ,dla 
flaa irolonialroglitio In liaxiXo aiugöpxxaju^t üatte» idts öci li^i Ixlaiupli 
daa poöltlvfln (Jolst;e? , Äiai.cK±toÄ» im Kampf« der Uensohhcit auf der j^anÄtn 
'^elt awlfioh^n damnej^tlyen ^md dciii poöitiveii Göiüte. In .iex öoalaoht 
von Pneblf? hßttjen <^le üoidaten dar Har^ubilk am o .:A9X 18G7- die Xrilfta 
das Hüokeohritta ^r'^nohln^^r^, aln ale gana ellain g-üganUber Jlor gaazau 
\70lt at«in(lf»n und nie habnn dadtiroh daro aiRariicauiüoheG republikani^oüen 
Prinalp ^e^n'Jbev dorr rüolcachrittlichen ea:rop;;.ibChen Triusip^rcrtretexi 
durch Minpol^cn TU r^uz: Gi«g> Terholfaa , Jefcat handle oa sioh aaruin, 
die posltire üra-^ürsg auf.TtivicJitGn, 

Barrada hatta in Jchre 1649 in .arit» Torlögaug«*.! des Philosophen 
Aii£rtiete Gomie eiber die ao3ohiohtc der j^eu^chh^ii gi?hört. ! it ihm ;?aren 
aaoh aüdera f.p'ni? aörcr anv;eBand und elf» ulle ^/arden 
eifrige Terfechtt^r des '^* cchcn Po^itivi&ii'.u8 in Asicrika /.essen Be- 
griffe hirr Barrada eaf Lexlco aui;ax^det,^^€»r Cumte'cohe ro$itivierL\ia 
dominierte Im letcinameriianlbcixen Geietaalcban Jahy»ehnte hindarch^ 
Dia Rolle I die -Bnrreda den Uexlkenarn in dar Gaachlohte diet l^en&chhöit 
luwaiat^hat netärlioh ^t den öoüiteachau Lehraät^en niühts üa ;ian^ 
lach Ihnen teilt alch aie leaechiieita^eöahionte in dx^ii Perioden ain, 
die tbaologleöha ,die metcLph;7ai30h9 anx die poaltirotln der ersten 
Periode lat die I?aligion,ln ö^t ZAClten dia iAat^pJo^aik und in der die 
positive wi8aen5?ohfift ii^e sageband, Die ^ Icaauaohafti^n traten dann an 3tel« 
la der theolofflsohan und r.etaph^sisohen Spekulationon* Allerdinga hat 
dann Comte selber in seiner Ä\'.^iten Periode eine lleliglon uer Uenaoh- 
heit verkündigt, deren Prophet und Hoheprieater er öelbbt war, Ifaoh 
aainam Tode trat eine Spaltung xwlaohan den orthodoxen Comte* ianem^ 

T A 

41e,Tor treten duioti Lafitte and oohin«f a^^ * ^ 

iloh äelner «weiten Perlode nltE^-ptUrf«« „„;, .. . . 

- , ^ -«r. ptt^rten nnn a-?n dnrch dgn b^k.unntan 

neraaagebtr dea "Diotionnn^rft « T^f*-— ' , . 

xonnn.rfl ilttr« v.H;rn.mcn ifaformrn. dJö n-or 

n.aU.™. ,^ C»,ologls«.^ .mn,lpl,,t ...«,„,„ ,011 1, roll. 0.,, 

D«nito .uaro ax. laoümnn dazu bernfer . ;fr coet^lf«t:« . . 

i^te .Che. a)«yu. "^«b, .ordnau^- uud i^ctsohrttt- r-^rd. 
<lna »vort "iiebe" durch "Freiheit" ereet^-t n.. e 
t„,, „T , •• ^ \ «-raet.t und £c aue. gelobt, das 2 rrclhelt 

„ - &n«roLle .el, ..«n »le danu rmalttUch v;Äre aovohl der .tnorecnlechgn als ..ucb 

Uer orgaulaohen Welt y.,relnb.,i- e.m. Mr »>..ihei. >..«.•• . 

'• ^^^ ^'-iftelt beBt-ndc nünaich In 

» . »n .ln.n K..p....„ ,e,.^. ,,„ „.^^.^^^ ^^^ ^^^,^^^^^^^ ^^^^^ 

anregt ander anfalla icU^ata dlo Jral'iötfc ,«ii,«4. ^ 

.,, , ^ , '-«Holt 3«lbat onfear geben. '^ünaclenawert 

vraaaag,]c9in^ aaarclil.^oii^ iTsihülc. 

,j^_^ «a.^ 9i will, ubxr «r muaa naoh dsn 
«rora.x^»..n «=, <;.acUooh.n h...d..In. I.r .t„t .oll .,„ „1,4» 
u..r 41. .rea... .i„„, o.^.un, 6...„.„. „. ^.„,„,, ,„,,,„^^ 


der Seeell^ohnft .-icaert.Daa HtuiptÄiöl d6»r Ideologen dea m^xlk^iniiahcu 
Pooitivlamaö ist yo-^ialu üictiiaag uua 4afc nau6 aeJt Ari:j.rolile,ole aelt Pe- 
öoltlguug der 6i)ani^ohoa H^rröoaaft um öloii grifft Uiia wie apit^::r 
der Phrußoph JUGtc ;:iierra tji± «^riaärt hat, war ait PraoLt die£»er Crd- 
nurifr die iutwiOiatmg dys 0x3 xikaiii sehen üiirgertuicdt L'lö K^lohen h^iten 
dr'3 3ooht,dio R^ichtMner aa geniea««»n,äie ihnen :lie viösellboiiaftaicrdaTmg 
tib'jrlvl'i3t* Öocii üind rie ülütlich Yerpfllohtst riie üeoextohVB^^ d^s 

nioht direkt frlr}pr<>»if^m, ^ieln;ehr beatv-^ht nnoh Bar2?e6£ seine ;.ufgaT^e 
darin, '"die ^t^ioh^n su Imianibi^ren'S :txir ^»taati aoll aiohl iu I/x'joreao« 
Irjyend «fixier Taaöse iat^rvei'iiöreu.äie Jn'^vvioklua^ dea .^«ioLitiu.iii liegt ira 
Interesna der Gf aell^otxaf u; aia B^ioiiea sind guwliaermaeaiia die Verwahrer 
taa geaell3C*i!tftliohon aeiJhaUKia^den al« am o^öten ä'i scnu.-ilu aixd au 
entivlolceln versteliör.» Der S'&ai.t aut aioli nioht dariiic au kü:(:n.3rn,wle die 
Henaohfin denken, sondern blo^^s die g^aeeil^^chai'tliua« Ordnuixg aiifreoht- 
erhalten. Der iat;?.at itt ncoh Barreda auf Cevi G^l^ieto dar peraöulioh.n 
Ideolo^i^ii uuf' ct<a i^ivateigeutnma m;utrs*l» 

Jl9 PolgrxA die£*.»r Lt»iu4>u lifebb^u liicbti xan^^ü aitf cioh wcrfeen^araial 
nuiic infolg« der LmchaoLilag^iui'&jrt aer i)arvdiiiychexi Idtoloeio , ^zufolge 
1^ 11 TT on im Lc'bonaiCGiTipx^ o» < ■ w (j^nfgrr^uf o.nö L^'btaischaftllohe Lelien 
aueev/€n et v/ardc.Ald ira ^ulu^ö 10713 O^noral iPorfixio jjiai ntvch einer 
Bevclntlon ariO 2:t.a,GclGngton euch dln SOßlince doe Earrtuaiic'aen 
Ä2irlxnnß0s:;ot,^n;ß aiua Zugtuöi^ waren Anhüngcr aer "Oidriunß", lu^^uuten 
sloh konaorvBtiv-libor&l-riam ^^teroohicd Ton i:olonial}!:ctisi.ervaiiveu- 
böhauptetan/' 3S -lexiXo für die Freiheit nicht rrif ^."«ir. Ihrnm utand 
die Il>^er6l6 Ver.>.beang von 1687 im "^ege. Der Ilora sgebtiX der ^Lj. Liber- 
tad" Justo Sierra lAeiute.daaB dieee Verfassung Tmreailötiöoh,fein Und 
dee lo*?i oben Geiatee lateinisoher Alenbchan^war • üloiat ooiule^ÄOudern 
Her}>ert Spencer m d Charlee x/cJfwin wurden die Propheten dee konaerratiren 
Liberal Ismus. Franciaoo G.Coemeii rief aoa: X^e Le^d verlangt nioht 


Hechte, condarn Trot. -i« atovl^oli erhaben« Vcrfasaung wxrde uU vorUrk- 
lloht . Ter 'Tßg l>-t aiohl; T-xa, ar. dcw di« iietion sügtn wird: loh vidll 
Crfttitcrig und FTiciSii s^^lbtt uii dea .i'«xö r.ielner Ur^bhüngiöi-<äl^-« ''^-i' babea 
Bohori ao rirlc fechte gectheu, die mir 'j^louc hervor rioft-n, duaü- 
«8 rdt einer "cl.r£*ol,en .lkt,:.tiir ,tJai.r »tiraaia aärraüa" ^rörsuchöü 
wollen, Dl«£er fihrliohe Illtacor i-'ori'irio i-laa. 

Sicht COFite »lt. 8*l.acr F-orubrimg tUvOL ünterv/sr rt;Äg antt-r die 
PordMunge» der GeF-t-llsohef t v^tir J«tat dw. niexi..foti.isou«ju lü-u^tSörtua »ill- 
koinm«n.Bond«»n äff lin IndividaA-llaiuuB "/curzeicde (.nfeliaoli« rOoitivlomaa 



und tJtllltarlemnp des Tohn :i^ew5rt lüUV^^öbrt ateuwer. 
«ntsprsoU CL^t C-^i^-t &"■& iti.d beiBpieliij..f « v.-ui'ien dit iibor»- 
lon Regime ^glnnaa uad i-.r V^i'^iaigtua itaeteß, Spencer» i^crtsohrittt- 
peaanJre Icearte iie frt;le ?:ütf{..ltnfl6 der Freiheit ,dle uelutüü, lu 
<ier T.viivrtt v--7/ft!.rlsletcxi. Tri Slons Spenoera aagte Justo ;iierra ,da6B 
necsh seiner •?!« «ss-lTs'obaft ein super orgaalunius 30l,A6& ieaetaan 
dar Brolutlca untsrvjorfen. A-toh die Gr^aftllaohafl; satA-i^|.l3 aioü 7Cu de* 
Homoganaitiät aar Inäii'idasiidtl^o^eu itiffeieai;ls--ans,voä dar ürdüüüÄ zar 
vollen 7reih3it.AbHr ..axiko ist elrt aJi'u«» .ai^int voi- eatwio^eitea Lünd, 
es i'V^n zuerat Ordnung Ta3iaial:>a mä/aglva aar ?ralhsit 2oliTai1>aii,aainal 
neben Mesiko jin b^wand'ira.ißavflctaa :coli*iJctivi3 Tln l»bt, füJ desaen 
iolossRlen Magen ea Inina gsnagjude üahrimg gi^t.'ia iat gei-Uatjet, uns 
»ti reraohlingen.wir sind ge5;eaUber dißaoui Kolo^iüiia ier atfalir £.u»ij;2*etat, 
ein .Bemel» der .nohtlskei t da? 'J^i^orle zu v-eiü«»!.,.- ^u- 
gimaten der aoelali^n i*Tol\ivloo,v.'le obi. jasio dierrc taevxdokt.vixd die 
polltlaobe Srclutlon auii-ohst z^cvfsxt und eü« iftoht Poifliio jiaz 
Übertragen, der ««1* eohon 1376 aripclff und dann vcü löo-i. bia 2ö..»at 1911 
ttntwterbroeber behlelt.Sr aohier. die» ea a3n.bvllaleron,v.a6 die daroh 
T'ositlriflma ersogenG Gonoration cueebnt«: Ordnung uid j,'ri*aeii. 
Die Oeneratlon der Torflrianlaohen 2elt wbt praictlslstlaoh 
•inär-atellt tmd trollte alle« Tregan.auob die politiaoben.wlaatiiaohaftlloh 



-^ r\ ^ J A V Ol 

Y-as Ihnen daß hOhnUab^ Bulwort ''lod JiariU/icoö'' eintrugt ^^ine Partei 

»lirfi-nr Art ^did sich "Üixioa. Llbfrul* 

«anij.{;3i,,aas <-(& mex-lkf nirch«in7??»öoMf.r>n« iTalhritm aufzählt« , für 
die ea heruitj, aio i;ei.fp orrfilohi, hiUt« .eber dieo wnren TeraohledeM 
oJsomoiaiBciie ficlhfiton.dit den: reichen Bürger dienten, die politlaoh« 
?r«lheit;,die uls iartpl gegfin den Aiii«n d«8 iorfirio iJlaa ga« nloHt 
d'«ahd«t;4d»i ^0£.Dlifc,ivBx eicht d&x<uiter.iJuhll«Beiioh wurda Juato 31epjra,der 
dön -I-oxfirUi;" v^rUidig-t;« .s»,^««»«. eelöat 8tnt?,leg. .ir hegte dl. 
Bäfu,foiiiüiig,dufca iflsK der . «iogel echtej- ^T«iheit auch den Terlnat deaatn 
najii sicii sitlwü uuisata, wa« man auf der ibeti« der eozlalen Evolution 
erreicUt ii&t.e. Wr u&fcce uan gewlohtige Bedenkan gef«ii diu Mktat« 
ciuur 4.di'ö0ü .^i^, ^elegiernn^^ , Ixer poxitiaohtn STeihflit.a an ein« 

i^traoa sji Z.^ die ^ukunf'u uU-jrauB gefäürlloh; aie zuahtat Ga-vchnheiten, 
die cä.% ^ui£>btr;»,ji«ruug taiTaxeiabar aeien und ohne sie X^rxa«^ raaa zwar 
öTOäu« Ki.ntt3x IxaD*.ii,ab«r it.*in grossem Volk, sr ariiüJcte die Hoffnung au» 
daüs nich das aeÄiianitohe Volk auf dleewn Scheidewege seiner Oeeohioht« 

uiid (^liiÄijrj nif-ndang oln.»9Aro Hanriq^teÄ Urans' »der aue 3an 
Dcnlngo l»iN»Äi-^*-?T^n 1-bhnften Anteil an der mexlkftnlsohen Jugend- 
bewogung nGhDi,flJh?ie^ bereite im Jahr« 1909: In "exilco let die Philo- 
sophie Co-iite»» jalfc den Theorien von äpsnoer und den Ideen von Jtilll 
die offiRltlli' ihilt^üphie v-i« aje l-i Dnbcrrioht üijoh die riofonaen 
von äabluo Barrada elngcftthrt wurde. ile"Eä/ai3h/al« ideoioglaohe örund- 

läge der In KrofU b^^finilichen poHt.iRohen Tendenz en gebraucht Aber 

BOtto vooe gahli oin '3rtll der Jugend „pattfr a-iJere ' Bf-o , , ,^lit4k Eritik 

iüt nioht konaervar.lY-katnoilBoh.'^ondBrn forteo"»rlttllch,,Sle fln{j rlt 
dei- üirüiiiteu '^edfl Iton Jn.Uo Jlerrn«» (1900) zu SKren Barrede« und mit 

der eiaen ouer audsren Arbeit au» dem Kreis« der n«a«n "Scoledad d« 

Oonf«xenoi»g" kana an," Die»« 


I. I 

der int«ll«ktuell«n Jugend 


hieae spltar ^kt^n^o da la Jovcntud'*, 

^^y^ JDleaa irltii: daa ,0oltlvi8mu«,eifi:lärt dar Ul^.toi'ilwor dar 
PhiiocOphie P^rtitjrxc.o Sf'lAioron, er Öffnet $in üeufjs Zcitaite/ in der gei- 
stigen UurjohiohU ja6>.ii^;c-ft • Jufitc ;;»ierra hat eigentlich oereitB 1Ü74 oen 
lehrinhalt de« i^oaitivibmu^ abgelehnt uüd öeafeen Grur^dwiÄChauiingen 
«urU(^.kgfl^l^sen4 In dee iled« au ihren -^arreuaa hat er seine äicepeie»..» 
angesichts d«r T^rkuiSohetung und dei TToutinr dee PositivianiTis auajre- 
druolLt nebst tinigen öad&nken üher die Grenzen trnd den nelatiyiamnB der 
wisaenaohaftllohen firkenntnia, mja her^^ir^te dann dio Be nUhnngen dar 
jTXp^rA».,Dl'!i^e :U4w^ zweierlei ä: <!'f>a frnnsöalsohe 19. Jahr hundert ala 
?*.lterariseh'^» Modell xv d. d^m PoiHlvInmni^ in der rhilccophie« Jle ver- 
einigte eich im "Ateneo de la Jp.nta3- (d.^ Mt^en^uin der Jagend«). 
Hier gruppierten sich soIohG " nr.or wi<2 Jo^^e Vaaconoeloa (1062-1959) 
und Antonio Oaao tlöes-lt^46) , die i»ahren Yäter der modernen laexikanl- 
aohen Phllosoptle, (der chriftEteller Ufonao Hejea (1889-1959), der 

aioh den Fragen der Id«engee3Uioht Araber spch^der li^tj»rariäohen Theoria 
widmete.'^^*^ anttini^und lliiltnrTDhllosoohie mr)aein ciheftieT;« Auch der 

3oi*,ial-iuid KuLltnrnhilosoohie 7ar)aeln Hh 

(ia68-l^<i;6) ' 

Mtera Ssequlex A#0havc2./v;iirdi von der Bewegung Jattgeriaaan^ obwohl er 

dam "Ateneo da la J^vsntcid" nicht angehörte« Diese jungen Leute daa 

^•Ateneo*' ▼erteldigt*»n ^m^ v?ie liberalen Ideen Barredaa ohne aioh mit 

aainom PoöitiviöiuuB sa ladeutiflaierfn. Antonio Oaao blelt über ihn 

-«■Hte Vorträge in üw "iiLcuela iiaoicncJL Preparctorla" • Der ^'Ateneo" 

Ternn0t*ilt^te in uioöar uitt^lsoinae Yortragf» aur reier der hunüertjäh- 

ri^en Itaeb hän^i ^ke i t .lezikos (iOlC) nna Ve^conceloa ■ \ )r^bel q^"Don 

^aabino Barredö una die k;eit^^>euöeftiaoh'^r If^ctr^"^ . Ti?!»nc!4nal pr&eidlertan 

b^i eolohen 

der Stcalt5^'?l:3^^trt fllr ^^t'^rrioht Justo Sierra 

oder 5ar T1toterat?i«taeek-retcir "Jss luiel A. 'Ihüre:^. l'il^'^ ]^•innor gehör t,(in 
nilTaioh z^x den Lehrern der :atglie-er das 'U^.«n^o'' in -lor "osouela ^B-pB^ 
ratoria'* und in dar ^eohtaf&kultät >i?r Universität tiie begannen die 4^ugen 
Leute vom Poaitlviamua au entf|igt^ftj^d*ift tiebrige be3orgteu Sruppenleaungen- 

un^ ttä^a^ 



Mqp dlt^kntlfjfte Fant nnd Il5t;o,aber auch dftr\ a^^rilCÄnlaoh^n ?i'atrniitißt«a 
William Jnn<»g,dan Itr.Ü -nlich^^n lascllslen Benedettc Orooo ^i^x^ji ai^tzsoh« 
und ^oii07>enh/».tter,«ea? riaoh 7«i3oonc2los in KalnMi das f:anae T,oaern9 Zeital- 
ter enth?"nt.. vor nllmvL Haas rmm dio aaitgcnößaiaohen freMöslaoh^sn PhilOr 
sophon Borgson vn^ Boutroux anf oloh ?/lr^«n. Auch d^A'^MoöernlaTnii«'' , de» 
damala Im fr3R»Ör,l«ohön KatHoll^lsTriTi» so lobhaft auftrat .erräbnlie rlol 
später -19g?.- wtonio Cf?so,als ^r gegen den "rdokatändlgen PoslOlviamti« 
pol«nlrjleruö. i)i6j:ea gan^e phllonophisoho lntore»«0ngf»\)let wäre damal« 
la !?axopa aiohta Bösonddre» gewesen, wohl aber In Kexlko^In zml Auf- 
sätÄca, in denen er 1909 die Vorträ-je ron Antonio Ca«* be-^prach, bexoerk- 
to eer er^^uhnto a^iirici^e« TTreflÄ »daaa aomte*« Angi^lffe gftgcn dlf iiata- 
ph;yai:i sich ©Igc^ntlloh auf die 3oholPstl|lbeÄO^n mit ihrer inender«, 
die irachainiangpn dtrch tTr2aoh-sn,antitwit6n ^ii;d Weaenh'^lten bv. (»rklt^ren^ 
Er.«tRtt^cioh t?4f aje -^Irsr^naohöft rdji HttiirgmetaGn «n b^aohjftij-^n^ 

'Jnoh<^ s*^^ aber nloht i?' 5 s rterkinal der wehren »ti»phv'ftll:,vl'^lrichr 
ff^.t ea d^a Br^ritrftben,d5.f» ""rf^^ihrnnfratatBachen »u vf5rolt\hritllcfcen mid 
die v;5,noennohaftl?ch!Jn ?rl:fnntnlrae v7olten8Ch?»tillob 4d^B»^BM4C,.^£vTjie» 
wl2^ö<^« T»hllc^'0-nhlscho Prcjrcürt: der ^gen ^en PosltlTlsnoß c'^rlchtsten 


?hllosci?hl?^ rndncc ^cr ner.en (r^nerationiwÄi, ^inen derartl^crn Teraucb, 
die wlßaerwohaftllöhen .:rkcnivtTti:ist nioht &büulohnen,aon':?.ern eher In 
eineir gef^eniiätzliohen aplrltnalietiechcn ^lon iiji^» jmwite^^vnt^rnahru 
Bergison« Tn seiner Gr Acj^lrrtde libör Berreda wi^a Vpaconoeloa darnnf hin, 
da«3 diö drei Perioden Ocnte'e - die rellalöae,!netftT»by«laohe rm^ rrlsaen- 
eotiaftlichc- keinen atuf/^nwi^ieen Pcrtsohrltt bed^nten^f^ondfrn dafta ea aioh 
dabei tiKi unt'cr^ahiedliohe^aber glelohüoitis be3teb«nde wrlebniegeblete 
handlejl« Der Ii'K^:mrtit:'rAiis aeige tnn rein In.tramcntElen A'ert ^r^r ?ri»»en- 
ßchß.ft ui-d die laläasigfcalt metnpliyalBoher PoJttrlnen auf nioht rationaler 
Orux.dlaget -—- X.I0 BeecbiJ^tienng ttlt kcttrh^till:, Mu ülrwelteTurig der 
m^naohliohen ÄlebDlrfehl^jkaitpCle Bebauptxing,da»* die Freiheit die 
Orundlage des 5cidtea/%der flacWruak wxt den K^nechsn selbst ^verleiht 

der "Ateneo" -Gruppe elaon i'ori, dar den 3ohriften der PosltlTlsten fehlte, 


4fn oinf^H chrltUiohcii Opilmlsmub^ dn Wcithüxaigiislt miL ^ifc;bö isujn Volke ♦ 
Darauf wifia nuoh der links »tehendo Yirioentö aiorabardo i^uluvk^ao li* ü«lno|; 
Sobrlft ^3>er homanlatiaobie Slrm der iüesikaiiii.v^iiöa Hcvoiaülon'' fl930) hin. 
Dlf^ r^n« fJriierstlon, erklärt or^ stellte dem öoaiaien i^arv^iniauiua leri 
Oe^jr^nk#rj de» freien '7111 fs^na^der yersatworta g oer laon^ohllohon Pursönliohkelt 
er)tp«^*f#*n, Jem y^tl^ohlernue der YieaenaoJiaft die Uaäjrsuotitinß der cb:?rsteu 
<Jru:.Mliriatii^,ao:'* Konformität dea TIeberlebeae der Süülitigoa die oarietliohe 
Jlloiitkonfjrüdtat dea Lebeö» dtiroh lötegrlarimg roa axx und raioli^e bildet ^*^>c^ 
und ^n^c/bildcft/^on Hcohmltlgen und Itobeiiatx. -ds mirde Ja aüoii 1912 ulne 

?oli;öu Ivttxiität aweokji Aufklärung aller -^"> -» ^ -"^ttie'i fi ir^^ ^r " ' V t ^ 

die trrt-.2 fl«r fiaatraden Revolutionswirren aöhüTaure laug bestc-heci konnte» 
A^af der vcn Antonio Cf^ao geleiteten aatioiislunlT^röiti;.t •vuüi.e freie pWlo- 
eophiache Porsohxmg elogefüiirt» 

Mo latglif^det dea ^Ateneo'» betrsohteteu den Ic^itivlE^iuß :;l2 aie 
Phlloßophlc der Biht&tur dea Porflrlo jßia» Uiid dex Auit^xiiL^auör Patriot 
Roiranßll meint, daai. die Fülxrer dca'^Atenec»^ awar nioiit uU politlaohan 
Dentcr der von ffranoiaoo kadwro (1911) gefWuten Mexlkanisohen acvolu- 
ticn,\^ohl Hh^T Ihre geiatifeen VoxlUnfer tvaren» jDooii v^^ixen ihre politlsoben 
^if?ioht/*u In ^^ii ^a ec ^-mnaloht m i üüMmieii '^ingQniQ Gaeo gbKwtfc eirjpa: ELub 

Ä ftrF/5orfirJ 


aioh ^tUA^ 


19ü9/gegan Porfli*io IH*»« y^-^mxt Herausgeber der Leitung »^^ Aiitirsölooolmilata'« 

^ \ / 

.^adero v/&r,dif gegen die Wiederwalil ron .^crfirloplaa 

ifaC'i dem ,^lt.^«» Mftderos wurde Jose Vaocouoeloa Prkbident acr jitöneo" 
da^ In "Ät*3L.eü do jiJexico'* umbanannt v?urde»Man einigte :-ioii Ui^^'auf ^daea Bil- 
dung von Politik unftbhijiglg bleiban nüsaa und fanconceios aeiuue, 
daa^s möri elnjt natlon^iloa Profil dea ciexlkc.niöche;! Volkca solieffta müeae, 
daa ao lange atunm geblj^ben .var» Daa ^'^teneo*' fieracreute aicä no^oh dem Tode 
lladeroa. ^ :>i^ unbestrittenen Moakuren dar apirituull^tti ohfin r?efori| 


der l'hiloi-ophle in Mexiko waren Antonio Oaao und Joae Taaoonotloa, dar «rata 

als Lehrer -na Rektor dar aiiv<?T8ift.-it , der a.veilj-. als Uaterriohtarainlstar * 

''''^^' i *«« TH ia i fcMi^a^^ii»— ft.y.^eenofloc war steta politisch 
angagijrt.Cnso e1-.i?t8 der Lehrar, der "mr.cotro de los ir^estroa^-der Lahrmaiater 

dar letii-rcsls^^hrcnd Vj:.ö<jonefllo8 "ito«atro dp 1«.8 lUventade^^/geBiw^^ 
waxac Tind so^ar Jer tsrühcben Ü.Il .A ,M . f lUar üniversltad Hacional Autonom 
da Jifi.'^icu; lliran -aiacoruoh jprajjta: iJuroti nHoh wird der Gelat apreahan,- 
Taacov'iueJo-s .?sr ala üetaphyaUter und ÄnltorphilosopK viol phantasieroll ei.« 
»la der aiiohterner» GaadVasoonoelca ffar philo60,.hlaoh3r Autodidakt, 
aeiue Itarufliohc Bildnxig die einea Heoütaenwiat&,o-bwohl or aagen durfte, 
d«aa er /an iüatar Philosoph aaljer war nto'i «hwr pclitl ei sr ender Philosoph 
eis rhllo.corhloratidar PolUilcer, denn In «eln-r polltiä3h''n rarrlera erntete 
ar wenig arfol(T^>pitarffo 7.1? oTa üa^ne« n^nr^e ihn f.U mencoblloh und intellefc- 
tuen <?rs'rel-f-tie.?,t(» »iKtiT.aie T/exiko her-rorg-ebrocht hnt. Peboren als 3ohn 
fiaeö kleinen TieaTritcn In OaiceCÄ em ?7^T«l,ruar 1382 ,l3bt<^ nr seit 1897 In 
der Haupt,.? ^adt ?ils i^tudlerender der ^Äacuteisi Naoional er o parat or^»* tmd dann 

der "KCiCaela Hscional da tTurlsprudeaoiafdsr i^atioin«len Heohtaaohule ),wo er 
1^05 d^Oi Da)tr?ft «ln93 iooh^aaavvaltft er;;arb. r nrha Im ZoTrqpf g«gen Porfirio 
ries nlt d^r T^ffe tall^umrde au^läudiaoliar Tarfereter MadMc« in Washington^, 
D»C./Gnr] tüTKlsiodtoK nach dec Tode iladi^roa wi^denxm Yetreter der revolutionär in 
Reglf^rnng In »V««hlngton,D^'J. und ..cndon.Svrelii^l gln^fer ins ixil, ZvVGimal 

licrencliuorta . 
una drnu ^'-^t u' Cbregon^raa er auoh i^extor ^tr Jaireraität TonMexioo(^. 

dx vmrde <5fn^idat für dau aourerrieurpobtcn ^eJMa Heimctstaatei Qoxaoa und 

g uia dribtoi >ial 
ging ai^iaitHia/inti j?xli,als ar nio^it gewiuilt wiu&v^* Neoh Aeci Tode übregona 

h?:im/<^dl.i Zaudidatar für die Prucilaoutäalicft der Hepnbllk an, er wurde 

«pn vierten iialeXiuL.J^^ 
aber rlclat cewählt^v-anierte wled^rucylns Iti'^nZnS »Lr kohrte erat 194a 


bcJa^i f?te »IT den rosten eine» Jnfeerrio:' tsiilnifftnra -unter 

in oio üelu-.t lUTuok^rurie GrUndungcmitgiied dea '»7?1 Oolegio Uccicnal de 
Mexlao*' (dca ^rngef^ir Cqtl ''College' ^^ ?/Tnnoe ^* cr^t^^pr loht) und blieb bia 
fu seiueui 1959 e^fol^ton Tode Direktor dor ^'^ibllotheoa de llcxloo« 

d.h. der maxlkanibohen flationalbibliotlieiC 



So Ist eine BoBoaderhait der iuox:l3carili^oh«n Hcrolution, dass 

die gelatlgo Bowe^^uiig^die aia l)e{5lGit«t#ö,nU;li1; nafcerlpliatlsoh , sondern 

-im (}T5 2f«ns*).tz «ur ruftaisohen- apiritJie.liatiach 7/ar« Dies ist ao 25U hB'^ 

greifpüjdciaa PodifciviamiiB und liat^riaLiamua a?,a Inbogriff ^n Porflria- 

niaohsn Diktatur ,nb©r auoh dsa aa3läMls:)!ian,no?d.iT3'3ril?:.?also!ien Bln- 

in^fjcikio^^^/ ia den Landein 

fluflaoa^^^Bi&Täbft d<ir Pooi tlTlsrntin Heribert 3p?ncers is 

. -\1 *i. 

engllr,chf*r 3prB.ohe vo:-horr?ohte. ¥an v/clll;e vlie etlo>1/?? Lrift öer Por- 
flTianiL^ohnn Bpooho rainlfran.dlf^ soliliLfi'igc I?ahß os noxlk^.nlsohen in- 
tellektuellen "^.ebsng nnteybrechen, JUvii Tni^ji il d^e Geflüd ftb« celsti 
I7;5rt9 ^-/de (aornnel Barnos,der Hi3torikt»T lar mexlk:nl3Chen Philosophie 
r,- ' Jngcnd einiinpfen. ^13 rerflochtrm rieh hier nr.tlonale mit 
eittlichon tuii'I philoacphL^cheti Uotiv;iuP^j€? ;mrde r'er Spiritualißmaa 
der Philrr^ophl« Berp?ons irnm Sinnbild der "S^clhcit^woe denn auch ^^'^^A/^, 
Charl^a Pegto» ron ihn. meint^e: II a ronpn noa f?r«-Er hat ttnfiere Ket- 
ten f;OQpronct,^omit die Ketten dea r)??turwiseen9chnftllchen Materialia- 
mua gemeint vmren» Caso ^Tacoonoeloc griffen flle?« Anregungen auf 
und spielten eino diuiliohö i;oi:-e in koxllio wie die idealistiaohen Philö-,- 
30pheu dsr glelohan 2eit iu auropa« In llexioo waren die Haler viel 
radikaler als diti Philoaoxjhen ,aia noig^jen oher wie Ribnra oder 
der nooh honte lebt^nde aiq.ueixoa dea 'Äarxi 3Tnuß ziJ^don Vaaoonceloa ateta 

Ob;ronl i^ich Vasooncolos einea Bcrgccnioten nette, Irorr» cvm ihn mit 
dem ni7oht<»rnfrn urii^, behutaauftTi Gelehrter iint T^rV.enntnisthnoretiker 
"^orfTPOn Y^wr Ti»rplnichrii, clor die svbtllü Tntorflc!)*5ldTing ZFisohen 
räuni.lioh^;tj xiwt Zeitlichem D^ai^ion^.'^wlBclv-n a:ral7t1oOhen mnthematischam 
Benkon und dera intutiven Frf.^asen tiof Al3ht1 -rr Tc?:eah8iten unter- 
acheidat» Vasconcelos hat eine Hsihe ihilc;üophig;Oher und politischer 
Schriften in lurger Js^hren veröfieutlicht , aber er^it eeine Stellung 
als Eettor der üciveraitt-t und ul8 ühterriohtsminirter vfrllehen 


rTT^o^f -, , ., ^t3-i.ieirp(13So) und "Indclogia" 

Um rahf ^r. > '-a^— i-.ui-,cb6u !?aäde geaacht, 

•rklkre tMoh (iüJfaua.daaa die /ei-mi»^,,«- 

*Jn« ruuft;a Häaat.eben dl*» -'mit-.. 

- ^» ' J-3t.ia<»,in dw aioli die riet 

c.. ... .,.,., ,,„„ ,,„^^^ ,^^^^ ,^,^^^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^ I- 

3-hav.-Mh V . f;^a,.e; lucuene dU Jeb erlief er an« 

«4 • 't"tintu,fcrila toll üiciit bli.n« 

lltiaohe .die dritt« und i**--!-- ^ * 

,— u ufi.i,i« utm i«t;at«, deren ^'e-i"-«r -i .;- • o. . 

•tJ.i;e OGCi JLsi:hcUaöhe. Auf der erster m^. * . 

«4 , ... '''^" »^»^-^«ao iraft doa eiuzi« 

Bind«mlt..i .er .atioceu^auf der .^ite^ Ub.r.ic^L o.. •, 

nnr,ft,«.ze dl. ixrtumar der (Je«alt r.f.o^t^ -- ' • -• ,-. 

Bl^rtjlnaeai sie aiiea a»» n^^ * t aistsa organlat- 

-fr^.*ad. ;.i,8ea ^eue 3tadim» wird 




d^-u-oaabäi^o-amori^aniaohe iJakanf taraa». Inren Ausdrucl. finden rmt da 
aa ainar uauea 4iviUaHl.ion auofa eine neue Philo. ophlc vo^reten let, 
Wird auoli eine auf das üaflUU b^cründcte rhilc.orhlc cntPlehen,der.I 
«rata dodwalb« eber- Jia i'hiloeophlc von ^B.3Conoclo2 l.t 

Taaoono«lo8 ist «bc-r kein I^^tion^üst ia. enropilach-n 3in^e 
und .vae hinter diesam yolksng^ttiua -daa Wort "ra^V ist 1-.. Sp^nicohoa 
aiont eiodau.lg.ea Jrarm Hasse, /olir.Art, i.t üna nn- 
auagesprcohana Ablehnirag d.a uad nan.ntlioa dea :.l.r:.-lamu. 
und öas Bestxeban.ihm «iu yolkabc-«a..t.ein -«i„c ".onai.r,oi. d. 1^ raza^ 
entceger^uaetzen.Mu.« Teuden. ko.^t uioüt llar ..„. 7oT.oh,i,,d, dar einen chri.tiauisier.ndan,h-ai.anit^;,ren 3o.i«ll..naa s^pfiahlt 
a:.d ai. desBon erste Aafg^ba eine .iUU.hc 5äui,erunp öer ^^relt fordert. 
Dioee ächrlft,«n .r.cb.cncn nc^iich in cimr 2eit,dic .n den -goldan.n ' 
Jaüreu des -.ur;ci.uu. in (1W7-2E ) t.höron, als Vr^oconoelo. 
von i^sixuouen fcac.-cifoi bessalt vcraacht. liexlko durch Rrzi.hung 

au '^oi'lü^tin*" 

deine öi^ä^Uiohoa i.lUio.ophl .ohcn dohrlften aröffntt« 
/a.ooaaeio8 (ISlö; ^'. dar öbadio "2^ thaßoraa.eina Th.orl, de. TThyth- 
i"a6'',üiö üu^iat, lü üa.a und rier Jahra später in Mexloc ^rsohi^n. 
^x legt hiar be»aiohoeod9rv*9ifla dsa H^tjptg-jwicht dag P7th,yoräl,ohen 
Danians nioht auf die .i«tl,en..ti]c .rondsrn naf de- rhvthnl.oh^n Slaioh- 
ilang,den die Sahlenordnung aymbolisiert. In seinem l*,tzten wöraaran 
Phiioao^hischea , erk .d«r "Todolcgia" (et.-a "Allkond««) )echilicrt Ta.- 
ooncoloe aeiaun iVerdegaiig.ind«.. er mit dcia "Pythrrcrpa" beginnt und 
ihn ndt aar "Todolcgia" abschllcaat.u:: zu .acen: "Diee i«t\lne 
schau.aie nit dar mngnetiaohen «eile unaebend aohllesslioh in der Drei- aia der hl. Paulus definiert, gipfelt. Di.a erachUesat 
nxi^ dan Ainn d.a vorliegondan 3ichea." Das nuoh ist also «ine Synthese 

das L9vk.9uä 

eines .'erfcsaers. deinen örnndbeprlff fenß er in dem 

Phy&italitchen £onaept der •'BAcrgi(j'',dio 

auf nledelgster Stufe 




im iüagaatlaiaua in :irB,h.innns tritt, nm dann imn)«r höhere formen anzu- 

neixmn,^ wiu .i^i.aio'x m ußr.r^r Phlloaophif der Koordioation ffisaen- 

soai^.ft, i'iiiicfic^liic uua Cffonh..runs amtieren, Ternunft.OefühX iml '.il- 

ifln iu üiue^ diatsin voreiligen, 4^3 er -Aeathetlk" nennt, M» auauamen- 

fiigimfe (coupoöioiQn),die dergeataU rollbreoht wird.ergibt eher etwa« 

alec eino üiil#Iict;icolie 
wie «inea oasii^ulischoa AmTd^-id weniger ein. logilche Uebertinetim- 

nnmg. ioai;n iat xiaofx \rasoonQelos ein Streben naoh üinhelt.ÄA^thÜl- 
Inag dar Bezielxungaa aller 7e8er:(Eer9a) lu^ln/^er .Diese Beziehungen 
Bind rflar an die Regeln der Vernunft «bundm, ober bU entepreohen 
auoh einer Sebereinanderreihung e »<,.!„^ah , ii/ der Harmoni. ^d dieses 
Bsatrebon nuch Vereinigune ^^r^elt In der IlebeEirentib^jM passiven 
ärkonntnie durch Logik steht dJe nlrtive I?rirenntn^/di77loh in'flhytli- 
mus, Melodie und Uarr.onln cntfeltetonrl alle Sataachen der ÄirkliohJceit 
in ih.-er ioibhivf l,i^itit,in ihr^r fr-rbl^cn Vielfalt liefert, ohne sie 
logisch zu reduzieren, lieber ästhetischen Ärkenntniafcrm entereht der- 
gestalt kein Wesen and ^Ir Yereinigen ao in unserer Ansohanung die he- 
tercgynaten nsmente.guoh dle.5enis.en,dle der rationalen Verntmft unzu- 
gteelioli ^^'^'^^'^'^^^^ varachi^dene/^J^er ästhetiHchen Erkenn.« 
uib uiid dies uinä^h M» atnfoa das Gefallens. JJie höchste stufe 
orrelchv die äßt^hotiacho iJrJranntnia in der kultischen Liturgie ,aemi 
in lixr begianen die 7oapn nra '>äbtllohcn teilsunehmen. Die fii^hik ist 
die Lahre /on der BeatLaming das Manaohen, die wenn sie die höohbt« 
itofo erreicht, die Gestelt .jiner Sorm annimt. DU Beligion iat ab« 
die ?hiJ.^3ophie d<ir :iJthik,d^s»fftäen beiieht die Sthik Ihren normen 
d.h. 'ieoote vom ^j^pixa ios Qlaubena.den sie ^'^-^^■^^ 

/asoonoeLos geht von ärn Bgsrlff-n fler Sxiaten« und der Weaen 
fa^rsB) aaa.Allea was existiert ist »truktnrlerte Bner?ie,dle mit den 
^uantfcnv.ell5n Echtbt, stj-, Atem, dem ersten JtruktTirgebilde des Kosmos 
aufetfcigu und »ich in den üolefcnlarayst